Amubarvimab

Passive immunotherapy, including monoclonal antibodies and neutralizing proteins, was used for the treatment of patients with COVID-19 during the pandemic. Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 (ACTIV-3/TICO) was a multinational, randomized placebo-controlled platform trial that evaluated the effectiveness of multiple passive immunotherapy agents in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Given the long half-life of some agents studied, participants were followed for an extended period to assess the long-term efficacy and sustained safety of these agents.

We conducted a pooled analysis of individual participant data from four trials of ACTIV-3/TICO: sotrovimab, amubarvimab-romlusevimab, tixagevimab-cilgavimab, and ensovibep. Cox proportional hazards models were conducted to compare time to mortality and time to mortality or rehospitalization between participants receiving active agents vs. placebo through 18 months.

A total of 2311 participants were enrolled between 16 December 2020 and 15 November 2021. Overall, 56.9% (1315/2311) received an active agent and 77.2% (1784/2311) of participants were unvaccinated for SARS-CoV-2. Median duration between symptom onset and enrolment was 8 days (interquartile range, 6-10), and most participants received remdesivir (92.1% [2129/2311]) and corticosteroids (70.4% [1627/2311]) before enrolment. There was no difference in mortality across all active (11.9% [157/1315]) vs. placebo (14.0% [139/996]) arms (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.70-1.08). Furthermore, there was no difference in combined mortality or rehospitalization across all active (31.7% [417/1315]) vs. placebo (32.1% [320/996]) arms (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.84-1.10).

In our large study of long half-life passive immunotherapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we did not find evidence of a long-term effect on either mortality or rehospitalization.

NCT04501978.

This study was carried out to verify the evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of sotrovimab in patients with COVID-19. This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials retrieved from the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases. The risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane Risk and Bias Checklist (RoB 2). For the meta-analysis, RStudio Version 2024.04.2 software was used. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022355786). A total of 1893 studies were identified and four were included in the study. The total population consisted of 5470 patients with COVID-19, 1921 (35%) in the sotrovimab group and 3549 (65%) in the control group (placebo or BRII-196 + BRII-198 or casirivimab + imdevimab or bamlanivimab + etesevimab, administered in a similar way to sotrovimab, in a single dose with a 60-min intravenous infusion). For the effectiveness outcome, three studies presented low risk and one high risk of bias, while for safety all presented high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the sotrovimab and control groups in terms of hospitalization rates (95% confidence interval (CI) - 2.10-0.51; p = 0 > 0.05), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (95% CI - 2.78-0.65; p = 0.35) and mortality (95% CI - 0.92-0.59; p = 0.39). However, sensitivity analysis showed that sotrovimab may be effective in reducing hospitalization rates compared to the control (IV =  - 1.57; 95% CI - 2.41-0.73; p = 0.99). The use of sotrovimab in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 had no significant impact on mortality and need for mechanical ventilation and did not appear to be safer compared to controls. However, there was evidence of effectiveness in reducing the rate of hospitalization, although the certainty of the evidence is moderate and the risk of bias is high.