Abstract
Background Omicron variant questioned the efficacy of the approved therapies for the early COVID-19. In vitro data show retained neutralizing activity against BA.1 and BA.2 for remdesivir (RDV), molnupiravir (MLN), and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NRM/r), while poor efficacy for Sotrovimab (STR) against BA.2. No data about the risk of clinical failure and in vivo antiviral activity are available. Material and methods Single-center observational comparison study enrolling all consecutive patients with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (BA.1 or BA.2) diagnosis and who met eligibility criteria for treatment with RDV, MLN, NRM/r, or STR. Treatment allocation was subject to drug availability, time from symptoms onset, and comorbidities. Patients were followed through day 30. Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) VL was measured on day 1 (D1) and D7 and was expressed by log2 cycle threshold (CT) scale. Comparisons between groups were made by Chi-square and Wilcoxon paired-test. Primary endpoint was D1-D7 VL variation. Potential decrease in VL and average treatment effect (ATE) were calculated from fitting marginal linear regression models weighted for calendar month of infusion, duration of symptoms, and immunodeficiency. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of D7 undetectable VL in NPS and clinical outcomes compared by treatment groups using a Chi-square test. Results A total of 521 pts received treatments (STR 202, MLN 117, NRM/r 84, and RDV 118): female 250 (48%), median age 66 yrs (IQR 55-76), 90% vaccinated; 15% with negative baseline serology. At D1, median time from symptoms onset was 3 days (2,4). 378 (73%) pts were infected with BA.1 and 143 (27%) with BA.2. D1 mean viral load was 4.12 log2 (4.16 for BA.1 and 4.01 for BA.2). The adjusted analysis showed that NRM/r significantly reduced VL compared to all the other drugs in pts infected with BA.1 while no evidence for a difference vs. MLP was seen in those infected with BA.2. MLN had comparable activity to STR against BA.1 and to NRM/r against BA.2. There was no significant difference between STR and RDV for BA.2. At D7, 35/521 (6.7%) pts had undetectable VL. Of these, 31 were infected with BA.1 [9 (9%) MLN, 7 (14%) NRM/r, 7 (8%) RDV, and 8 (5%) STR)], and only 4 with BA.2, all treated with NRM/r. After 30 days of follow-up, 9/568 pts experienced COVID-19-related clinical failure [7/226 STR (5 BA.1) and 2/87 NRM /r (2 BA.1)]. Conclusions In this analysis of in vivo early VL reductions, NRM/r appears to be the drug showing the greatest antiviral activity regardless of the VoC, together with MLN, although the latter limited to people with BA.2. In the Omicron era, due to the high prevalence of vaccinated people and the lower probability of hospital admission, VL decrease can be a valuable surrogate of drug activity.
Competing Interest Statement
A.A. declares consultancy fees from Gilead Sciences, Merck, GSK, Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, and research institutional grants from Gilead Sciences and the Italian Medicine Agency (AIFA).
Funding Statement
The study was performed in the framework of the SARS-CoV-2 surveillance and response program implemented by the Lazio Region Health Authority. This study was supported by funds to the National institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani, IRCCS, Rome (Italy), from Italian Ministry of Health (Programme CCM 2020; Ricerca Corrente - Linea 1 on emerging and re-emerging infections) and from the European Commission - Horizon 2020 (CoNVat, Grant agreement ID 101003544; KRONO, Grant agreement ID 101005075).
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:
Clinical research design protocols (even those not yet initiated) Ethics committee/IRB of Spallanzani Institute gave ethical approval for this work
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
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
