Background
Remdesivir is an RNA polymerase inhibitor with potent antiviral activity in vitro and efficacy in animal models of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19).
Methods
We conducted a randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial involving hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air, and radiologic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous remdesivir for either 5 days or 10 days. All patients received 200 mg of remdesivir on day 1 and 100 mg once daily on subsequent days. The primary end point was clinical status on day 14, assessed on a 7-point ordinal scale.
Results
In total, 397 patients underwent randomization and began treatment (200 patients for 5 days and 197 for 10 days). The median duration of treatment was 5 days (interquartile range, 5 to 5) in the 5-day group and 9 days (interquartile range, 5 to 10) in the 10-day group. At baseline, patients randomly assigned to the 10-day group had significantly worse clinical status than those assigned to the 5-day group (P=0.02). By day 14, a clinical improvement of 2 points or more on the ordinal scale occurred in 64% of patients in the 5-day group and in 54% in the 10-day group. After adjustment for baseline clinical status, patients in the 10-day group had a distribution in clinical status at day 14 that was similar to that among patients in the 5-day group (P=0.14). The most common adverse events were nausea (9% of patients), worsening respiratory failure (8%), elevated alanine aminotransferase level (7%), and constipation (7%).
Conclusions
In patients with severe Covid-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation, our trial did not show a significant difference between a 5-day course and a 10-day course of remdesivir. With no placebo control, however, the magnitude of benefit cannot be determined. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; GS-US-540-5773 ClinicalTrials.gov number,
NCT04292899
.)
Treatment with a once-daily, single-tablet regimen of ledipasvir and sofosbuvir resulted in high rates of sustained virologic response among patients with HCV genotype 1 infection who had not had a sustained virologic response to prior interferon-based treatment. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; ION-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01768286.).
Recognizing the importance of timely guidance regarding the rapidly evolving field of hepatitis C management, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) developed a web-based process for the expeditious formulation and dissemination of evidence-based recommendations. Launched in 2014, the hepatitis C virus (HCV) guidance website undergoes periodic updates as necessitated by availability of new therapeutic agents and/or research data. A major update was released electronically in September 2017, prompted primarily by approval of new direct-acting antiviral agents and expansion of the guidance's scope. This update summarizes the latest release of the HCV guidance and focuses on new or amended recommendations since the previous September 2015 print publication. The recommendations herein were developed by volunteer hepatology and infectious disease experts representing AASLD and IDSA and have been peer reviewed and approved by each society's governing board.
In phase 3 trials of patients with HCV infection, we did not establish that sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir for 8 weeks was noninferior to sofosbuvir-velpatasvir for 12 weeks, but the 2 regimens had similar rates of SVR in patients with HCV genotype 3 and cirrhosis. Mild gastrointestinal adverse events were associated with treatment regimens that included voxilaprevir. ClinicalTrials.gov numbers: POLARIS-2, NCT02607800; and POLARIS-3, NCT02639338.
Effective antiviral therapy is essential for achieving sustained virological response (SVR) in hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐infected patients. The phase 2 COSMOS study reported high SVR rates in treatment‐naive and prior null‐responder HCV genotype (GT) 1‐infected patients receiving simeprevir+sofosbuvir±ribavirin for 12 or 24 weeks. OPTIMIST‐1 (NCT02114177) was a multicenter, randomized, open‐label study assessing the efficacy and safety of 12 and 8 weeks of simeprevir+sofosbuvir in HCV GT1‐infected treatment‐naive and treatment‐experienced patients without cirrhosis. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by HCV GT/subtype and presence or absence of NS3 Q80K polymorphism [GT1b, GT1a with Q80K, GT1a without Q80K]), prior HCV treatment history, and IL28B GT [CC, non‐CC]) to simeprevir 150 mg once daily+sofosbuvir 400 mg once daily for 12 or 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was SVR rate 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12). Superiority in SVR12 was assessed for simeprevir+sofosbuvir at 12 and 8 weeks versus a composite historical control SVR rate. Enrolled were 310 patients, who were randomized and received treatment (n = 155 in each arm). SVR12 with simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 12 weeks (97% [150/155; 95% confidence interval 94%‐100%]) was superior to the historical control (87%). SVR12 with simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 8 weeks (83% [128/155; 95% confidence interval 76‐89%]) was not superior to the historical control (83%). The most frequent adverse events were nausea, headache, and fatigue (12‐week arm: 15% [23/155], 14% [22/155], and 12% [19/155]; 8‐week arm: 9% [14/155], 17% [26/155], and 15% [23/155], respectively). No patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. One (1%, 12‐week arm) and three (2%, 8‐week arm) patients experienced a serious adverse event (all unrelated to study treatment). Conclusion: Simeprevir+sofosbuvir for 12 weeks is highly effective in the treatment of HCV GT1‐infected patients without cirrhosis, including those with Q80K. (Hepatology 2016;64:370‐380)
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.