TY - JOUR T1 - Optimal dose and safety of molnupiravir in patients with early SARS-CoV-2: a phase 1, dose-escalating, randomised controlled study JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.05.03.21256309 SP - 2021.05.03.21256309 AU - Saye H Khoo AU - Richard FitzGerald AU - Thomas Fletcher AU - Sean Ewings AU - Thomas Jaki AU - Rebecca Lyon AU - Nichola Downs AU - Lauren Walker AU - Olana Tansley-Hancock AU - William Greenhalf AU - Christie Woods AU - Helen Reynolds AU - Ellice Marwood AU - Pavel Mozgunov AU - Emily Adams AU - Katie Bullock AU - Wayne Holman AU - Marcin D Bula AU - Jennifer L Gibney AU - Geoffrey Saunders AU - Andrea Corkhill AU - Colin Hale AU - Kerensa Thorne AU - Justin Chiong AU - Susannah Condie AU - Henry Pertinez AU - Wendy Painter AU - Emma Wrixon AU - Lucy Johnson AU - Sara Yeats AU - Kim Mallard AU - Mike Radford AU - Keira Fines AU - Victoria Shaw AU - Andrew Owen AU - David G Lalloo AU - Michael Jacobs AU - Gareth Griffiths Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/05/05/2021.05.03.21256309.abstract N2 - Background 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, 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.Results Of 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%.Conclusion Molnupiravir was safe and well tolerated; a dose of 800mg twice-daily for 5 days was recommended for Phase II evaluation.Competing Interest StatementPotential conflicts of interest. WH is a cofounder, owner and advisor of/to Ridgeback Biotherapeutics LP. WP is employed by Ridgeback Biotherapeutics. Potential conflicts of interest SK has received research funding from ViiV Healthcare, Gilead Sciences, and Merck for the Liverpool HIV Drug Interactions programme and for unrelated clinical studies. Unrelated to the current work, AO is a Director of Tandem Nano Ltd and co-inventor of patents relating to drug delivery. AO has received research funding from ViiV Healthcare, Merck, Janssen and consultancy from Gilead, ViiV and Merck not related to the current work. GG has received funding from Janssen-Cilag, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Astex, Roche, Heartflow, Celldex, BMS, BionTech, Cancer Research UK, NIHR, British Lung Foundation, Unitaid, GSK for unrelated academic clinical trials and programme funding. WG has received funding from the Wellcome Trust. No conflict. RF, TF, SE, TJ, RL, ND, LW, OTH, CW, HR, EM, PM, EA, KB, MB, JG, GS, AC, CH, KT, JC, SC, HP, EW, LJ, SY, KM, MR, KF, VS, DL, MJClinical TrialClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746183Funding StatementThis work was supported by Ridgeback Biotherapeutics. 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].Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the UK Medicines and Healthcare product Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and West Midlands Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesThe AGILE Trial Steering Committee will consider all reasonable requests by health-care providers, investigators, and researchers to provide anonymised data to address specific scientific or clinical objectives. The AGILE investigators are committed to reviewing requests from researchers for access to clinical trial protocols, de-identified patient-level clinical trial data, and study-level clinical trial data. ER -