COVID-19

REGN-COV2, a Neutralizing Antibody Cocktail, in Outpatients with Covid-19

Author/s: 
Weinreich, David M., Sivapalasingam, Sumathi, Norton, THomas,, Ali, Shazia, Gao, Haitao, Bhore, Rafia, Musser, Bret J., Soo, Yuhwen, Rofail, Diana, Im, Joseph, Perry, Christina, Pan, Cynthia, Hosain, Romana, Mahmood, Adnan, Davis, John D., Turner, Kenneth C., Hooper, Andrea T., Hamilton, Jennifer D., Baum, Alina, Kyratsous, Christos A., Kim, Yunji, Cook, Amanda, Kampman, Wendy, Kohli, Anita, Sachdeva. Yessica, Graber, Ximena, Kowal, Bari, DiCioccio, Thomas, Stahl, Neil, Lipsich, Leah, Braunstein, Ned, Herman, Gary, Yancopoulos, George D.

Background: Recent data suggest that complications and death from coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) may be related to high viral loads.

Methods: In this ongoing, double-blind, phase 1-3 trial involving nonhospitalized patients with Covid-19, we investigated two fully human, neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein, used in a combined cocktail (REGN-COV2) to reduce the risk of the emergence of treatment-resistant mutant virus. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive placebo, 2.4 g of REGN-COV2, or 8.0 g of REGN-COV2 and were prospectively characterized at baseline for endogenous immune response against SARS-CoV-2 (serum antibody-positive or serum antibody-negative). Key end points included the time-weighted average change from baseline in viral load from day 1 through day 7 and the percentage of patients with at least one Covid-19-related medically attended visit through day 29. Safety was assessed in all patients.

Results: Data from 275 patients are reported. The least-squares mean difference (combined REGN-COV2 dose groups vs. placebo group) in the time-weighted average change in viral load from day 1 through day 7 was -0.56 log10 copies per milliliter (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.02 to -0.11) among patients who were serum antibody-negative at baseline and -0.41 log10 copies per milliliter (95% CI, -0.71 to -0.10) in the overall trial population. In the overall trial population, 6% of the patients in the placebo group and 3% of the patients in the combined REGN-COV2 dose groups reported at least one medically attended visit; among patients who were serum antibody-negative at baseline, the corresponding percentages were 15% and 6% (difference, -9 percentage points; 95% CI, -29 to 11). The percentages of patients with hypersensitivity reactions, infusion-related reactions, and other adverse events were similar in the combined REGN-COV2 dose groups and the placebo group.

Conclusions: In this interim analysis, the REGN-COV2 antibody cocktail reduced viral load, with a greater effect in patients whose immune response had not yet been initiated or who had a high viral load at baseline. Safety outcomes were similar in the combined REGN-COV2 dose groups and the placebo group. 

Maintaining Safety with SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines

Author/s: 
Castells, Mariana C., Phillips, Elizabeth J.

To date, the development of mRNA vaccines for the prevention of infection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a success story, with no serious concerns identified in the ongoing phase 3 clinical trials.1 Minor local side effects such as pain, redness, and swelling have been observed more frequently with the vaccines than with placebo. Systemic symptoms such as fever, fatigue, headache, and muscle and joint pain have also been somewhat more common with the vaccines than with placebo, and most have occurred during the first 24 to 48 hours after vaccination.1 In the phase 1–3 clinical trials of the Pfizer–BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines, potential participants with a history of an allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine were excluded. The Pfizer–BioNTech studies also excluded participants with a history of severe allergy associated with any vaccine (see the protocols of the two trials, available with the full text of the articles at NEJM.org, for full exclusion criteria).1,2 Hypersensitivity adverse events were equally represented in the placebo (normal saline) and vaccine groups in both trials.1

Mucocutaneous Manifestations of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author/s: 
Young, Trevor K., Shaw, Katharina S., Shah, Jinal K., Noor, Asif, Alperin, Risa A., Ratner, Adam J., Orlow, Seth J., Betensky, Rebecca A., Shust, Gail F., Kahn, Philip J., Oza, Vikash S.

Importance: To date, no study has characterized the mucocutaneous features seen in hospitalized children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or the temporal association of these findings with the onset of systemic symptoms.

Objective: To describe the mucocutaneous findings seen in children with MIS-C during the height of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in New York City in 2020.

Design, setting, and participants: A retrospective case series was conducted of 35 children admitted to 2 hospitals in New York City between April 1 and July 14, 2020, who met Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and/or epidemiologic criteria for MIS-C.

Main outcomes and measures: Laboratory and clinical characteristics, with emphasis on mucocutaneous findings, of children who met criteria for MIS-C. The characterization of mucocutaneous features was verified by 2 board-certified pediatric dermatologists.

Results: Twenty-five children (11 girls [44%]; median age, 3 years [range, 0.7-17 years]) were identified who met definitional criteria for MIS-C; an additional 10 children (5 girls [50%]; median age, 1.7 years [range, 0.2-15 years]) were included as probable MIS-C cases (patients met all criteria with the exception of laboratory test evidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] infection or known exposure). The results of polymerase chain reaction tests for SARS-CoV-2 were positive for 10 patients (29%), and the results of SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G tests were positive for 19 patients (54%). Of the 35 patients, 29 (83%) exhibited mucocutaneous changes, with conjunctival injection (n = 21), palmoplantar erythema (n = 18), lip hyperemia (n = 17), periorbital erythema and edema (n = 7), strawberry tongue (n = 8), and malar erythema (n = 6) being the most common findings. Recognition of mucocutaneous findings occurred a mean of 2.7 days (range, 1-7 days) after the onset of fever. The duration of mucocutaneous findings varied from hours to days (median duration, 5 days [range, 0-11 days]). Neither the presence nor absence of mucocutaneous findings was significantly associated with overall disease severity.

Conclusions and relevance: In this case series of hospitalized children with suspected MIS-C during the COVID-19 pandemic, a wide spectrum of mucocutaneous findings was identified. Despite their protean and transient nature, these mucocutaneous features serve as important clues in the recognition of MIS-C.

Dynamics and Correlation Among Viral Positivity, Seroconversion, and Disease Severity in COVID-19

Author/s: 
Fu, Yu, Li, Yongsheng, Guo, Ensong, He, Liang, Liu, Jia, Yang, Bin, Li, Fuxia, Wang, Zizhuo, Li, Yuan, Xiao, Rourou, Liu, Chen, Huang, Yuhan, Wu, Xue, Lu, Funian, You, Lixin, Qin, Tianyu, Wang, Chaolong, Li, Kezhen, Wu, Peng, Ma, Ding, Sun, Chaoyang, Chen, Gang

Background: The understanding of viral positivity and seroconversion during the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited.

Objective: To describe patterns of viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity and evaluate their correlations with seroconversion and disease severity.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: 3 designated specialty care centers for COVID-19 in Wuhan, China.

Participants: 3192 adult patients with COVID-19.

Measurements: Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data.

Results: Among 12 780 reverse transcriptase PCR tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 that were done, 24.0% had positive results. In 2142 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, the viral positivity rate peaked within the first 3 days. The median duration of viral positivity was 24.0 days (95% CI, 18.9 to 29.1 days) in critically ill patients and 18.0 days (CI, 16.8 to 19.1 days) in noncritically ill patients. Being critically ill was an independent risk factor for longer viral positivity (hazard ratio, 0.700 [CI, 0.595 to 0.824]; P < 0.001). In patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, the IgM-positive rate was 19.3% in the first week, peaked in the fifth week (81.5%), and then decreased steadily to around 55% within 9 to 10 weeks. The IgG-positive rate was 44.6% in the first week, reached 93.3% in the fourth week, and then remained high. Similar antibody responses were seen in clinically diagnosed cases. Serum inflammatory markers remained higher in critically ill patients. Among noncritically ill patients, a higher proportion of those with persistent viral positivity had low IgM titers (<100 AU/mL) during the entire course compared with those with short viral positivity.

Limitation: Retrospective study and irregular viral and serology testing.

Conclusion: The rate of viral PCR positivity peaked within the initial few days. Seroconversion rates peaked within 4 to 5 weeks. Dynamic laboratory index changes corresponded well to clinical signs, the recovery process, and disease severity. Low IgM titers (<100 AU/mL) are an independent risk factor for persistent viral positivity.

SARS-CoV-2 immunity: review and applications to phase 3 vaccine candidates

Author/s: 
Gregory A., Ovsyannikova , Inna G., Kennedy, Richard B.

Understanding immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is crucial to understanding disease pathogenesis and the usefulness of bridge therapies, such as hyperimmune globulin and convalescent human plasma, and to developing vaccines, antivirals, and monoclonal antibodies. A mere 11 months ago, the canvas we call COVID-19 was blank. Scientists around the world have worked collaboratively to fill in this blank canvas. In this Review, we discuss what is currently known about human humoral and cellular immune responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and relate this knowledge to the COVID-19 vaccines currently in phase 3 clinical trials.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): People with Certain Medical Conditions

Author/s: 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Revisions were made on November 2, 2020 to reflect recent data supporting increased risk of severe illness during pregnancy from the virus that causes COVID-19. Revisions also include addition of sickle cell disease and chronic kidney disease to the conditions that might increase the risk of severe illness among children.

We are learning more about COVID-19 every day. The below list of underlying medical conditions is not exhaustive and only includes conditions with sufficient evidence to draw conclusions; it is a living document that may be updated at any time, subject to potentially rapid change as the science evolves. This list is meant to inform clinicians to help them provide the best care possible for patients, and to inform individuals as to what their level of risk may be so they can make individual decisions about illness prevention. Notably, the list may not include every condition that might increase one’s risk for developing severe illness from COVID-19, such as those for which evidence may be limited or nonexistent (e.g., rare conditions). Individuals with any underlying condition (including those conditions that are NOT on the current list) should consult with their healthcare providers about personal risk factors and circumstances to determine whether extra precautions are warranted.

Convalescent plasma in the management of moderate covid-19 in adults in India: open label phase II multicentre randomised controlled trial (PLACID Trial)

Author/s: 
Agarwal, Anup, Mukherjee, Aparna, Kumar, Gunjan, Chatterjee, Pranab, Bharnagar, Tarun, Malhotra, Pankaj

Abstract

Objective To investigate the effectiveness of using convalescent plasma to treat moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) in adults in India.

Design Open label, parallel arm, phase II, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Setting 39 public and private hospitals across India.

Participants 464 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital (screened 22 April to 14 July 2020) with confirmed moderate covid-19 (partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio between 200 mm Hg and 300 mm Hg or a respiratory rate of more than 24/min with oxygen saturation 93% or less on room air): 235 were assigned to convalescent plasma with best standard of care (intervention arm) and 229 to best standard of care only (control arm).

Interventions Participants in the intervention arm received two doses of 200 mL convalescent plasma, transfused 24 hours apart. The presence and levels of neutralising antibodies were not measured a priori; stored samples were assayed at the end of the study.

Main outcome measure Composite of progression to severe disease (PaO2/FiO2 <100 mm Hg) or all cause mortality at 28 days post-enrolment.

Results Progression to severe disease or all cause mortality at 28 days after enrolment occurred in 44 (19%) participants in the intervention arm and 41 (18%) in the control arm (risk difference 0.008 (95% confidence interval −0.062 to 0.078); risk ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.54).

Conclusion Convalescent plasma was not associated with a reduction in progression to severe covid-19 or all cause mortality. This trial has high generalisability and approximates convalescent plasma use in real life settings with limited laboratory capacity. A priori measurement of neutralising antibody titres in donors and participants might further clarify the role of convalescent plasma in the management of covid-19.

Trial registration Clinical Trial Registry of India CTRI/2020/04/024775.

Antiretroviral Drugs for Treatment and Prevention of HIV Infection in Adults: 2020 Recommendations of the International Antiviral Society–USA Panel

Author/s: 
Saag, Michael S., Gandhi, Rajesh T., Hoy, Jennifer F., Landovitz, Raphael J., Thompson, Melanie A., Sax, Paul E., Smith, Savey M., Benson, Constance A., Buchbinder, Susan P., Del Rio, Carlos, Eron Jr., Joseph J., Fätkenheuer, Gerd, Günthard, Huldrych F., Molina, Jean-Michel, Jacobsen, Donna M., Volberding, Paul A.

Importance  Data on the use of antiretroviral drugs, including new drugs and formulations, for the treatment and prevention of HIV infection continue to guide optimal practices.

Objective  To evaluate new data and incorporate them into current recommendations for initiating HIV therapy, monitoring individuals starting on therapy, changing regimens, preventing HIV infection for those at risk, and special considerations for older people with HIV.

Evidence Review  New evidence was collected since the previous International Antiviral (formerly AIDS) Society–USA recommendations in 2018, including data published or presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences through August 22, 2020. A volunteer panel of 15 experts in HIV research and patient care considered these data and updated previous recommendations.

Findings  From 5316 citations about antiretroviral drugs identified, 549 were included to form the evidence basis for these recommendations. Antiretroviral therapy is recommended as soon as possible for all individuals with HIV who have detectable viremia. Most patients can start with a 3-drug regimen or now a 2-drug regimen, which includes an integrase strand transfer inhibitor. Effective options are available for patients who may be pregnant, those who have specific clinical conditions, such as kidney, liver, or cardiovascular disease, those who have opportunistic diseases, or those who have health care access issues. Recommended for the first time, a long-acting antiretroviral regimen injected once every 4 weeks for treatment or every 8 weeks pending approval by regulatory bodies and availability. For individuals at risk for HIV, preexposure prophylaxis with an oral regimen is recommended or, pending approval by regulatory bodies and availability, with a long-acting injection given every 8 weeks. Monitoring before and during therapy for effectiveness and safety is recommended. Switching therapy for virological failure is relatively rare at this time, and the recommendations for switching therapies for convenience and for other reasons are included. With the survival benefits provided by therapy, recommendations are made for older individuals with HIV. The current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic poses particular challenges for HIV research, care, and efforts to end the HIV epidemic.

Conclusion and Relevance  Advances in HIV prevention and management with antiretroviral drugs continue to improve clinical care and outcomes among individuals at risk for and with HIV.

Subscribe to COVID-19