#Molnupiravir or #nirmatrelvir–ritonavir plus usual care vs usual care alone in patients admitted to #hospital with #COVID19 (RECOVERY)...

Summary

Background

Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir–ritonavir are oral antivirals that have shown efficacy in preventing disease progression in outpatients with COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate these treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonia, for whom data on these antivirals are scarce.

Methods

The RECOVERY trial is a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial testing treatments for COVID-19. In this study we report the molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir–ritonavir comparisons from the RECOVERY trial. In each comparison, participants aged 18 years and older were randomly allocated (1:1) to the relevant antiviral (5 days of molnupiravir 800 mg twice daily or 300 mg nirmatrelvir and 100 mg ritonavir twice daily) in addition to usual care, or to usual care alone. The molnupiravir comparison was conducted at 75 hospitals in the UK, two in Nepal, and two in Indonesia; the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir comparison was conducted at 32 hospitals in the UK. Participants could take part in both comparisons. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, and secondary outcomes were time to discharge alive from hospital and progression to invasive ventilation or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. Both comparisons were stopped because of low recruitment. This study is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.

Findings

From Jan 24, 2022, to May 24, 2023, 923 participants were recruited to the molnupiravir comparison (445 allocated to molnupiravir and 478 to usual care), and from March 31, 2022, to May 24, 2023, 137 participants were recruited to the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir comparison (68 allocated to nirmatrelvir–ritonavir and 69 to usual care). More than three-quarters of participants were vaccinated and had antispike antibodies at randomisation, and more than two-thirds were receiving other SARS-CoV-2 antivirals. In the molnupiravir comparison, 74 (17%) participants allocated to molnupiravir and 79 (17%) allocated to usual care died within 28 days (hazard ratio [HR] 0·93 [95% CI 0·68–1·28], p=0·66). In the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir comparison, 13 (19%) participants allocated to nirmatrelvir–ritonavir and 13 (19%) allocated to usual care died within 28 days (HR 1·02 [0·47–2·23], p=0·96). In neither comparison was there evidence of any difference in the duration of hospitalisation or the proportion of participants progressing to invasive ventilation or death.

Interpretation

Adding molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir–ritonavir to usual care was not associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. However, low recruitment meant a clinically meaningful benefit of treatment could not be ruled out, particularly for nirmatrelvir–ritonavir.

Source: Lancet Infectious Diseases, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(25)00093-3/fulltext?rss=yes

____

#Neuroinvasive #Oropouche virus in a patient with #HIV from extra-Amazonian #Brazil

{Excerpt} A novel reassortant Oropouche virus (OROV) lineage (with medium [M], large [L], and small [S] RNA segments : M1L2S2) has driven Brazil's largest and most geographically widespread OROV epidemic , expanding beyond the endemic Amazon basin to establish local transmission across multiple Brazilian states and other previously unaffected Latin American countries . The rapid spread of this lineage underscores its evolutionary potential and reinforces its significance as a public health threat .1 Similar to chikungunya and Zika viruses, expanding arboviruses can exhibit unexpected clinical and epidemiological shifts , including vertical transmissions , neuroinvasive effects, and potentially fatal outcomes.2–4 Although OROV typically causes self-limited febrile illness, accumulating clinical and experimental evidence suggests neurotropic potential .5 This Correspondence describes the first confirmed case of neuroinvasive OROV infection caused by the emergent M1L2S2 lineage in ext...

Stability of #influenza viruses in the #milk of #cows and #sheep

Abstract In late 2023, H5N1 high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAIV) started circulating in dairy cattle in the USA . High viral titres were detected in milk from infected cows , raising concerns about onwards human infections . Although pasteurisation was shown to effectively inactivate influenza viruses in milk, unpasteurised milk still poses a risk of infection, both from occupational exposure in dairies and from the consumption of raw milk. We therefore assessed how long influenza viruses could remain infectious for in milk without heat inactivation. We examined the stability of a panel of influenza viruses in milk , including a contemporary H5N1 HPAIV and a variety of other influenza A and D viruses. We incubated viruses in cows' milk under laboratory conditions : at room temperature to simulate exposure in dairies and at 4°C to simulate exposure to refrigerated raw milk. Following an isolated report of H5N1 viral RNA being detected in milk from a sheep in the UK , we also c...

#Evidence of #Viremia in Dairy #Cows Naturally Infected with #Influenza A {#H5N1} Virus, #California, #USA

Abstract We confirmed influenza A virus (IAV) by PCR in serum from 18 cows on 3 affected dairy farms in California, USA . Our findings indicate the presence of viremia and might help explain IAV transmission dynamics and shedding patterns in cows. An understanding of those dynamics could enable development of IAV mitigation strategies. Source: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/31/7/25-0134_article ____

ETIDIOH - NEW

Search This Blog