Comparison of Dual Monoclonal Antibody Therapies for COVID-19 Evolution: A Multicentric Retrospective Study

Autor: Karen Zafilaza, Jonathan Bellet, Aurélie Truffot, Vincent Foulongne, Manuela Mireille Onambele, Maud Salmona, Camille Vellas, Claire Périllaud-Dubois, Audrey Mirand, Elisabeth André-Garnier, Enagnon Kazali Alidjinou, Ségolène Brichler, Honorine Fenaux, Magali Bouvier-Alias, Cédric Hartard, Céline Dorival, Fabrice Carrat, Anne-Geneviève Marcelin, Karl Stefic, Cathia Soulie
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2024
Předmět:
Zdroj: Viruses, Vol 16, Iss 10, p 1542 (2024)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 1999-4915
DOI: 10.3390/v16101542
Popis: Background: Neutralizing antibodies targeting the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein reduce COVID-19-related risk of hospitalization, particularly in high-risk individuals. The COCOPREV-R study aimed to evaluate and compare clinical outcomes in high-risk SARS-CoV-2 patients treated with dual monoclonal antibody therapies and to identify associated virological factors. Methods: The COCOPREV-R study retrospectively collected real-world data from high-risk patients receiving Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab or Casirivimab/Imdevimab dual monoclonal antibody therapies (22 February 2021 to 15 June 2021). Results: The study included 1004 patients with COVID-19, of whom 691 received Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab and 313 received Casirivimab/Imdevimab. The alpha variant represented 90.1% of those for whom data were available. The risk of hospitalization within 30 days was lower with Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (12.7%, CI 95% [9.9–16.3%]) compared to Casirivimab/Imdevimab (28.4%, CI 95% [22.7–35.1%) (p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality rates were comparable between both groups (p = 0.982). Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity showed no difference between the two treatment groups (95.2% [93.0–96.9%] and 93.5% [89.1–96.6%] until day 30, p = 0.851 for Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab and Casirivimab/Imdevimab, respectively). Among persistently positive samples with available sequencing results (n = 43), Spike protein changes occurred only in Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab (42.9%) vs. Casirivimab/Imdevimab (0.0%) groups. Q493R (25.0%) and E484K (12.5%) were the most common mutations selected by Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab in follow-up samples. Other factors (immunodepression, comorbidities, and age) did not appear to be associated with the occurrence of Spike protein mutations. Conclusions: A higher rate of hospitalization was seen with Casirivimab/Imdevimab (RONAPREVE®) in comparison with Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab treatment, but with the emergence of Spike mutations only in the Bamlanivimab/Etesevimab group.
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje