SARS-CoV-2

Importance Estimates of the rate of waning of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 are key to assess population levels of protection and future needs for booster doses to face the resurgence of epidemic waves.

Objective To quantify the progressive waning of VE associated with the Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 by number of received doses.

Data Sources PubMed and Web of Science were searched from the databases’ inception to October 19, 2022, as well as reference lists of eligible articles. Preprints were included.

Study Selection Selected studies for this systematic review and meta-analysis were original articles reporting estimates of VE over time against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic disease.

Data Extraction and Synthesis Estimates of VE at different time points from vaccination were retrieved from original studies. A secondary data analysis was performed to project VE at any time from last dose administration, improving the comparability across different studies and between the 2 considered variants. Pooled estimates were obtained from random-effects meta-analysis.

Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes were VE against laboratory-confirmed Omicron or Delta infection and symptomatic disease and half-life and waning rate associated with vaccine-induced protection.

Results A total of 799 original articles and 149 reviews published in peer-reviewed journals and 35 preprints were identified. Of these, 40 studies were included in the analysis. Pooled estimates of VE of a primary vaccination cycle against laboratory-confirmed Omicron infection and symptomatic disease were both lower than 20% at 6 months from last dose administration. Booster doses restored VE to levels comparable to those acquired soon after the administration of the primary cycle. However, 9 months after booster administration, VE against Omicron was lower than 30% against laboratory-confirmed infection and symptomatic disease. The half-life of VE against symptomatic infection was estimated to be 87 days (95% CI, 67-129 days) for Omicron compared with 316 days (95% CI, 240-470 days) for Delta. Similar waning rates of VE were found for different age segments of the population.

Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against laboratory-confirmed Omicron or Delta infection and symptomatic disease rapidly wanes over time after the primary vaccination cycle and booster dose. These results can inform the design of appropriate targets and timing for future vaccination programs.

Importance: Recent advances in treatment and prevention of HIV warrant updated recommendations to guide optimal practice.

Objective: Based on a critical evaluation of new data, to provide clinicians with recommendations on use of antiretroviral drugs for the treatment and prevention of HIV, laboratory monitoring, care of people aging with HIV, substance use disorder and HIV, and new challenges in people with HIV, including COVID-19 and monkeypox virus infection.

Evidence review: A panel of volunteer expert physician scientists were appointed to update the 2020 consensus recommendations. Relevant evidence in the literature (PubMed and Embase searches, which initially yielded 7891 unique citations, of which 834 were considered relevant) and studies presented at peer-reviewed scientific conferences between January 2020 and October 2022 were considered.

Findings: Initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) is recommended as soon as possible after diagnosis of HIV. Barriers to care should be addressed, including ensuring access to ART and adherence support. Integrase strand transfer inhibitor-containing regimens remain the mainstay of initial therapy. For people who have achieved viral suppression with a daily oral regimen, long-acting injectable therapy with cabotegravir plus rilpivirine given as infrequently as every 2 months is now an option. Weight gain and metabolic complications have been linked to certain antiretroviral medications; novel strategies to ameliorate these complications are needed. Management of comorbidities throughout the life span is increasingly important, because people with HIV are living longer and confronting the health challenges of aging. In addition, management of substance use disorder in people with HIV requires an evidence-based, integrated approach. Options for preexposure prophylaxis include oral medications (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate or tenofovir alafenamide plus emtricitabine) and, for the first time, a long-acting injectable agent, cabotegravir. Recent global health emergencies, like the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and monkeypox virus outbreak, continue to have a major effect on people with HIV and the delivery of services. To address these and other challenges, an equity-based approach is essential.

Conclusions and relevance: Advances in treatment and prevention of HIV continue to improve outcomes, but challenges and opportunities remain.

Objectives: This meta-analysis investigated the use of fluvoxamine for the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies published before June 25, 2022. Only clinical studies that compared the efficacy and safety of fluvoxamine with other alternatives or placebos in the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included.

Results: Four studies with 1814 patients, of whom 912 received fluvoxamine, were included in this study. Compared with the control group receiving placebo or no therapy, the study group receiving fluvoxamine demonstrated a lower risk of hospitalization and emergency department (ED) visits (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95 % CI, 0.44-0.79; I2 = 26 %). In addition, the rate of hospitalization remained significantly lower in patients who received fluvoxamine than in the control group (OR, 0.69; 95 % CI, 0.51-0.94; I2 = 36 %). Although the study group demonstrated a lower risk of requirement of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit admission, and mortality than the control group, these differences were nonsignificant. Finally, fluvoxamine use was associated with a similar risk of adverse events as that observed in the control group.

Conclusion: Fluvoxamine can be safely used in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19 and can reduce the hospitalization rate or ED visits in these patients.

Keywords: COVID-19; Emergency department; Fluvoxamine; Hospitalization; SARS-CoV-2.

Abstract
Background: New treatments are needed to reduce the risk of progression of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Molnupiravir is an oral, small-molecule antiviral prodrug that is active against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Methods: We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with molnupiravir started within 5 days after the onset of signs or symptoms in nonhospitalized, unvaccinated adults with mild-to-moderate, laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and at least one risk factor for severe Covid-19 illness. Participants in the trial were randomly assigned to receive 800 mg of molnupiravir or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary efficacy end point was the incidence hospitalization or death at day 29; the incidence of adverse events was the primary safety end point. A planned interim analysis was performed when 50% of 1550 participants (target enrollment) had been followed through day 29.

Results: A total of 1433 participants underwent randomization; 716 were assigned to receive molnupiravir and 717 to receive placebo. With the exception of an imbalance in sex, baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. The superiority of molnupiravir was demonstrated at the interim analysis; the risk of hospitalization for any cause or death through day 29 was lower with molnupiravir (28 of 385 participants [7.3%]) than with placebo (53 of 377 [14.1%]) (difference, -6.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -11.3 to -2.4; P = 0.001). In the analysis of all participants who had undergone randomization, the percentage of participants who were hospitalized or died through day 29 was lower in the molnupiravir group than in the placebo group (6.8% [48 of 709] vs. 9.7% [68 of 699]; difference, -3.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -5.9 to -0.1). Results of subgroup analyses were largely consistent with these overall results; in some subgroups, such as patients with evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, those with low baseline viral load, and those with diabetes, the point estimate for the difference favored placebo. One death was reported in the molnupiravir group and 9 were reported in the placebo group through day 29. Adverse events were reported in 216 of 710 participants (30.4%) in the molnupiravir group and 231 of 701 (33.0%) in the placebo group.

Conclusions: Early treatment with molnupiravir reduced the risk of hospitalization or death in at-risk, unvaccinated adults with Covid-19. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme; MOVe-OUT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04575597.).