Dataset Information

US201 Study: A Phase 2, Randomized Proof-of-Concept Trial of Favipiravir for the Treatment of COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Favipiravir is used to treat influenza, and studies demonstrate that it has antiviral activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).

Methods

We performed a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of favipiravir in hospitalized adult patients with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients were randomized to standard of care (SOC) or favipiravir treatment (1800mg per os twice a day [b.i.d.] on day 1, followed by 1000mg b.i.d. for 13 days). The primary end point was time to viral clearance on day 29.

Results

Fifty patients were enrolled and stratified by disease severity (critical disease, severe disease, or mild to moderate disease). Nineteen patients were censored from the event of viral clearance based on being SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative at the study outset, being PCR-positive at day 29, or because of loss to follow-up. Data from the 31 remaining patients who achieved viral clearance show enhanced viral clearance in the favipiravir group compared with the SOC group by day 29, with 72% of the favipiravir group and 52% of the SOC group being evaluable for viral clearance through day 29. The median time to viral clearance was 16.0 days (90% CI, 12.0 to 29.0) in the favipiravir group and 30.0 days (90% CI, 12.0 to 31.0) in the SOC group. A post hoc analysis revealed an effect in the subgroup of patients who were neutralizing antibody-negative at randomization. Treatment-emergent adverse events were equally distributed between the groups.

Conclusions

We demonstrate that favipiravir can be safely administered to hospitalized adults with COVID-19 and believe that further studies are warranted.

Clinicaltrialsgov registration

NCT04358549.

SUBMITTER: Finberg RW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8651156 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEndocannabinoid dysfunction in animal models of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and accumulating, albeit anecdotal, evidence for efficacy in humans motivated this placebo-controlled double-blind comparison of two oral cannabinoid solutions in 150 participants (age 5-21 years) with ASD.MethodsWe tested (1) BOL-DP-O-01-W, a whole-plant cannabis extract containing cannabidiol and ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol at a 20:1 ratio and (2) BOL-DP-O-01, purified cannabidiol and ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol at the same ratio. Participants (N?=?150) received either placebo or cannabinoids for 12-weeks (testing efficacy) followed by a 4-week washout and predetermined cross-over for another 12 weeks to further assess tolerability. Registered primary efficacy outcome measures were improvement in behavioral problems (differences between whole-plant extract and placebo) on the Home Situation Questionnaire-ASD (HSQ-ASD) and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale with disruptive behavior anchor points (CGI-I). Secondary measures were Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS-2) and Autism Parenting Stress Index (APSI).ResultsChanges in Total Scores of HSQ-ASD (primary-outcome) and APSI (secondary-outcome) did not differ among groups. Disruptive behavior on the CGI-I (co-primary outcome) was either much or very much improved in 49% on whole-plant extract (n?=?45) versus 21% on placebo (n?=?47; p?=?0.005). Median SRS Total Score (secondary-outcome) improved by 14.9 on whole-plant extract (n?=?34) versus 3.6 points after placebo (n?=?36); p?=?0.009). There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. Common adverse events included somnolence and decreased appetite, reported for 28% and 25% on whole-plant extract, respectively (n?=?95); 23% and 21% on pure-cannabinoids (n?=?93), and 8% and 15% on placebo (n?=?94). Limitations Lack of pharmacokinetic data and a wide range of ages and functional levels among participants warrant caution when interpreting the results.ConclusionsThis interventional study provides evidence that BOL-DP-O-01-W and BOL-DP-O-01, administrated for 3 months, are well tolerated. Evidence for efficacy of these interventions are mixed and insufficient. Further testing of cannabinoids in ASD is recommended. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02956226. Registered 06 November 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02956226.

Project description:BackgroundThere are limited antiviral options for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone with a wide anti-parasitary spectrum, has shown potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. This study aimed at assessing the antiviral effect of IVM on viral load of respiratory secretions and its relationship with drug concentrations in plasma.MethodsProof-of-concept, pilot, randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor blinded trial to evaluate antiviral activity of high-dose IVM in 45 COVID-19 hospitalized patients randomized in a 2:1 ratio to standard of care plus oral IVM at 0·6 mg/kg/day for 5 days versus standard of care in 4 hospitals in Argentina. Eligible patients were adults with RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 5 days of symptoms onset. The primary endpoint was the difference in viral load in respiratory secretions between baseline and day-5, by quantitative RT-PCR. Concentrations of IVM in plasma were measured. Study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04381884.Findings45 participants were recruited (30 to IVM and 15 controls) between May 18 and September 9, 2020. There was no difference in viral load reduction between groups but a significant difference was found in patients with higher median plasma IVM levels (72% IQR 59-77) versus untreated controls (42% IQR 31-73) (p = 0·004). Mean ivermectin plasma concentration levels correlated with viral decay rate (r: 0·47, p = 0·02). Adverse events were similar between groups. No differences in clinical evolution at day-7 and day-30 between groups were observed.InterpretationA concentration dependent antiviral activity of oral high-dose IVM was identified at a dosing regimen that was well tolerated. Large trials with clinical endpoints are necessary to determine the clinical utility of IVM in COVID-19.FundingThis work was supported by grant IP-COVID-19-625, Agencia Nacional de Promoción de la Investigación, el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación, Argentina and Laboratorio ELEA/Phoenix, Argentina.

Project description:Favipiravir has demonstrated efficacy against the SARS-CoV-2 virus in several preliminary studies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of favipiravir for treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in outpatients and hospitalized patients. We conducted an open-label, randomized, active-controlled trial of a generic form of favipiravir in patients with COVID-19 confirmed by PCR-test. Eligible patients (18-60 years) after stratification were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) to receive either favipiravir (1800 mg BID on day 1, followed by 800 mg BID for up to 9 days), or standard of care (SOC) treatment (umifenovir + intranasal interferon alpha-2b, or hydroxychloroquine) for up to 10 days. The co-primary outcomes were the time to clinical improvement and the time to viral clearance. Among 190 patients assessed for eligibility 168 were randomized to favipiravir (n=112) or to SOC (n=56) group. The median time to clinical improvement was 6.0 days (IQR 4.0; 9.3) in the favipiravir group and 10.0 (IQR 5.0; 21.0) days in the SOC group; the median difference was 4 days (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.14-2.34; P=0.007). The statistically significant difference in the median time to viral clearance was observed only for hospitalized patients: 3.0 (IQR 3.0; 3.0) days in the favipiravir group vs. 5.0 (IQR 4.5; 5.5) days in the SOC group (HR 2.11; 95% CI 1.04-4.31; P=0.038). The rate of viral elimination on Day 5 in the favipiravir group was significantly higher than in SOC group: 81.2% vs. 67.9% (RR 1.22; 05% CI 1.00-1.48; P=0.022). The rate of clinical improvement on Day 7 in the favipiravir group was 1.5-fold higher than in SOC group: 52.7% vs. 35.8% (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.02-2.22; P=0.020). Favipiravir was well-tolerated and the most common adverse reactions were asymptomatic hyperuricemia, transient elevation of ALT & AST, and mild gastrointestinal disorders. Favipiravir was superior to the SOC in shortening the time to clinical improvement in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.