Question: is remdesivir an effective treatment for COVID-19

Title: Clinical benefit of remdesivir in rhesus macaques infected with SARS-CoV-2. Content: Effective therapeutics to treat COVID-19 are urgently needed. While many investigational, approved, and repurposed drugs have been suggested, preclinical data from animal models can guide the search for effective treatments by ruling out treatments without in vivo efficacy. Remdesivir (GS-5734) is a nucleotide analog prodrug with broad antiviral activity1,2, that is currently investigated in COVID-19 clinical trials and recently received Emergency Use Authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration3,4. In animal models, remdesivir treatment was effective against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV infection.2,5,6 In vitro, remdesivir inhibited replication of SARS-CoV-2.7,8 Here, we investigated the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in a rhesus macaque model of SARS-CoV-2 infection9. In contrast to vehicle-treated animals, animals treated with remdesivir did not show signs of respiratory disease and had reduced pulmonary infiltrates on radiographs and reduced virus titers in bronchoalveolar lavages 12hrs after the first treatment administration. Virus shedding from the upper respiratory tract was not reduced by remdesivir treatment. At necropsy, lung viral loads of remdesivir-treated animals were lower and there was a reduction in damage to the lungs. Thus, therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated early during infection had a clinical benefit in SARS-CoV-2-infected rhesus macaques. Although the rhesus macaque model does not represent the severe disease observed in a proportion of COVID-19 patients, our data support early remdesivir treatment initiation in COVID-19 patients to prevent progression to pneumonia.

Title: Clinical benefit of remdesivir in rhesus macaques infected with SARS-CoV-2 Content: Effective therapeutics to treat COVID-19 are urgently needed. While many investigational, approved, and repurposed drugs have been suggested, preclinical data from animal models can guide the search for effective treatments by ruling out treatments without in vivo efficacy. Remdesivir (GS-5734) is a nucleotide analog prodrug with broad antiviral activity1,2, that is currently investigated in COVID-19 clinical trials and recently received Emergency Use Authorization from the US Food and Drug Administration3,4. In animal models, remdesivir treatment was effective against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV infection.2,5,6 In vitro, remdesivir inhibited replication of SARS-CoV-2.7,8 Here, we investigated the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in a rhesus macaque model of SARS-CoV-2 infection9. In contrast to vehicle-treated animals, animals treated with remdesivir did not show signs of respiratory disease and had reduced pulmonary infiltrates on radiographs and reduced virus titers in bronchoalveolar lavages 12hrs after the first treatment administration. Virus shedding from the upper respiratory tract was not reduced by remdesivir treatment. At necropsy, lung viral loads of remdesivir-treated animals were lower and there was a reduction in damage to the lungs. Thus, therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated early during infection had a clinical benefit in SARS-CoV-2-infected rhesus macaques. Although the rhesus macaque model does not represent the severe disease observed in a proportion of COVID-19 patients, our data support early remdesivir treatment initiation in COVID-19 patients to prevent progression to pneumonia.

Title: Clinical benefit of remdesivir in rhesus macaques infected with SARS-CoV-2 Content: Background Effective therapeutics to treat COVID-19 are urgently needed. Remdesivir is a nucleotide prodrug with in vitro and in vivo efficacy against coronaviruses. Here, we tested the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in a rhesus macaque model of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods To evaluate the effect of remdesivir treatment on SARS-CoV-2 disease outcome, we used the recently established rhesus macaque model of SARS-CoV-2 infection that results in transient lower respiratory tract disease. Two groups of six rhesus macaques were infected with SARS-CoV-2 and treated with intravenous remdesivir or an equal volume of vehicle solution once daily. Clinical, virological and histological parameters were assessed regularly during the study and at necropsy to determine treatment efficacy. Results In contrast to vehicle-treated animals, animals treated with remdesivir did not show signs of respiratory disease and had reduced pulmonary infiltrates on radiographs. Virus titers in bronchoalveolar lavages were significantly reduced as early as 12hrs after the first treatment was administered. At necropsy on day 7 after inoculation, lung viral loads of remdesivir-treated animals were significantly lower and there was a clear reduction in damage to the lung tissue. Conclusions Therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated early during infection has a clear clinical benefit in SARS-CoV-2-infected rhesus macaques. These data support early remdesivir treatment initiation in COVID-19 patients to prevent progression to severe pneumonia.

Title: Remdesivir in treatment of COVID-19: A systematic benefit-risk assessment Content: Background: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to strengthen the ongoing understanding of the benefit-risk balance for remdesivir in COVID-19 treatment by using a structured method which uses all available data. Methods: The Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit-risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared to standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed,Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. Results: Several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared to placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR=1.23, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) comparted to the placebo group (26%), however more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared to those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). Conclusions: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest a favourable benefit-risk profile for remdesivir compared to placebo, however there is limited safety data available at the current time. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit-risk assessment.

Title: Efficacy and harms of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Content: Background: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19. Methods: Systematic review in five engines, pre-print webpages and RCT registries until May 22, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies evaluating remdesivir on confirmed, COVID-19 adults with pneumonia and/or respiratory insufficiency. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinical improvement or recovery, need for invasive ventilation, and serious adverse events (SAE). Secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay, progression of pneumonia, and adverse events (AE). Inverse variance random effects meta-analyses were performed. Results: Two placebo-controlled RCTs (n=1300) and two case series (n=88) were included. All studies used remdesivir 200mg IV the first day and 100mg IV for 9 more days, and followed up until 28 days. Wang et al. RCT was stopped early due to AEs; ACTT-1 was preliminary reported at 15-day follow up. Time to clinical improvement was not decreased in Wang et al. RCT, but median time to recovery was decreased by 4 days in ACTT-1. Remdesivir did not decrease all-cause mortality (RR 0.71, 95%CI 0.39 to 1.28) and need for invasive ventilation at 14 days (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.23 to 1.42), but had fewer SAEs (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.63 to 0.94). AEs were similar between remdesivir and placebo arms. Risk of bias ranged from some concerns to high risk in RCTs. Interpretation: There is paucity of adequately powered and fully reported RCTs evaluating effects of remdesivir in adult, hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Remdesivir should not be recommended for the treatment of severe COVID-19.

Title: Remdesivir in COVID-19: A critical review of pharmacology, pre-clinical and clinical studies Content: BACKGROUND & AIMS: Remdesivir is a broad spectrum anti-viral drug that has shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, in vitro and in vivo. In absence of any effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), remdesivir has been tried for a compassionate use in severe COVID-19. Newer randomized controlled studies that have recently become available, showed a mixed result. We aimed to systematically search the literature to understand the pharmacology and clinical effects of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrial.Org and MedRxiv database up till May 5, 2020 using specific key words such as "Remdesivir" or 'GS-5734â³ AND "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" and retrieved all the article published in English language, that have reported the pharmacology and the clinical outcomes of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Initial compassionate use of remdesivir has shown a fairly good result, but difficult to quantify, in the absence of control arm. While the very first double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted in Wuhan, did not find any significant benefit compared to the control, the preliminary result of another similar multi-country trial has shown a significant faster time to recovery but without any difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir has shown a mixed result in patients with COVID-19 with an acceptable side effect. However, jury is still out while awaiting the results from the forthcoming trials.

Title: Remdesivir in COVID-19: A critical review of pharmacology, pre-clinical and clinical studies Content: BACKGROUND & AIMS: Remdesivir is a broad spectrum anti-viral drug that has shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, in vitro and in vivo. In absence of any effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), remdesivir has been tried for a compassionate use in severe COVID-19. Newer randomized controlled studies that have recently become available, showed a mixed result. We aimed to systematically search the literature to understand the pharmacology and clinical effects of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrial.Org and MedRxiv database up till May 5, 2020 using specific key words such as “Remdesivir” or ‘GS-5734″ AND “COVID-19” or “SARS-CoV-2” and retrieved all the article published in English language, that have reported the pharmacology and the clinical outcomes of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: Initial compassionate use of remdesivir has shown a fairly good result, but difficult to quantify, in the absence of control arm. While the very first double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted in Wuhan, did not find any significant benefit compared to the control, the preliminary result of another similar multi-country trial has shown a significant faster time to recovery but without any difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir has shown a mixed result in patients with COVID-19 with an acceptable side effect. However, jury is still out while awaiting the results from the forthcoming trials.

Title: Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit-Risk Assessment Content: INTRODUCTION: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit-risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit-risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit-risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit-risk evaluation as more data become available. METHODS: The Benefit-Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit-risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. RESULTS: Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87-1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit-risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit-risk assessment.

Title: Remdesivir in Treatment of COVID-19: A Systematic Benefit–Risk Assessment Content: INTRODUCTION: There is a need to identify effective, safe treatments for COVID-19 (coronavirus disease) rapidly, given the current, ongoing pandemic. A systematic benefit–risk assessment was designed and conducted to examine the benefit–risk profile of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. A key objective of this study was to provide a platform for a dynamic systematic benefit–risk evaluation, which starts with inevitably limited information (to meet the urgent unmet public health need worldwide), then update the benefit–risk evaluation as more data become available. METHODS: The Benefit–Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used to assess the overall benefit–risk of the use of remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19 compared with standard of care, placebo or other treatments. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and government agency websites to identify literature reporting clinical outcomes in patients taking remdesivir for COVID-19. A value tree was constructed and key benefits and risks were ranked by two clinicians in order of considered importance. RESULTS: Using the BRAT method, several key benefits and risks for use of remdesivir in COVID-19 compared with placebo have been identified. In one trial, the benefit of time to clinical improvement was not statistically significant (21 vs 23 days, HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87–1.75), although the study was underpowered. In another trial, a shorter time to recovery in patients treated with remdesivir was observed (11 vs 15 days), with non-significant reduced mortality risk (8% vs 12%). Risk data were only available from one trial. This trial reported fewer serious adverse events in patients taking remdesivir (18%) compared with the placebo group (26%); however, more patients in the remdesivir group discontinued treatment as a result of an adverse event compared with those patients receiving placebo (12% vs 5%). CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary clinical trial results suggest that there may be a favourable benefit–risk profile for remdesivir compared with placebo in severe COVID-19 infection and further data on benefits would strengthen this evaluation. There is limited safety data for remdesivir, which should be obtained in further studies. The current framework summarises the key anticipated benefits and risks for which further data are needed. Ongoing clinical trial data can be incorporated into the framework when available to provide an updated benefit–risk assessment.

Title: Probable Molecular Mechanism of Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19: Need to Know More Content: Abstract COVID-19 is now pandemic throughout the world. Scientist, doctors are searching for effective therapy of this diseases. The remdesivir, an antiviral drug, is appeared as ‘molecule of hope’ for the treatment of this disease. USFDA approve this drug for the treatment of COVID-19. The molecular mechanism is unknown. In this paper, we tried to describe the probable molecular mechanism of remdesivir to inhibit the RNA synthesis of SARS-CoV-2. However, more detail mechanism is needed to understand mechanism of action of remdesivir.

Title: A promising antiviral candidate drug for the COVID-19 pandemic: A mini-review of remdesivir. Content: Remdesivir (GS-5734), a viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) inhibitor that can be used to treat a variety of RNA virus infections, is expected to be an effective treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. On May 1, 2020, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for remdesivir to treat COVID-19 patients. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, this review presents comprehensive information on remdesivir, including information regarding the milestones, intellectual properties, anti-coronavirus mechanisms, preclinical research and clinical trials, and in particular, the chemical synthesis, pharmacology, toxicology, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir. Furthermore, perspectives regarding the use of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 are also discussed.

Title: A promising antiviral candidate drug for the COVID-19 pandemic: A mini-review of remdesivir Content: Remdesivir (GS-5734), a viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) inhibitor that can be used to treat a variety of RNA virus infections, is expected to be an effective treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. On May 1, 2020, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for remdesivir to treat COVID-19 patients. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, this review presents comprehensive information on remdesivir, including information regarding the milestones, intellectual properties, anti-coronavirus mechanisms, preclinical research and clinical trials, and in particular, the chemical synthesis, pharmacology, toxicology, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir. Furthermore, perspectives regarding the use of remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 are also discussed.

Title: Probable Molecular Mechanism of Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19: Need to Know More Content: COVID-19 is now pandemic throughout the world. Scientist, doctors are searching for effective therapy of this diseases. The remdesivir, an antiviral drug, is appeared as 'molecule of hope' for the treatment of this disease. USFDA gave emergency approval to this drug for the treatment of COVID-19. The molecular mechanism is unknown. In this paper, we tried to describe the probable molecular mechanism of remdesivir to inhibit the RNA synthesis of SARS-CoV-2. However, more detail mechanism is needed to understand mechanism of action of remdesivir.

Title: Efficacy and Safety of Remdesivir for COVID-19 Treatment: An Analysis of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trials Content: BACKGROUND Remdesivir, an inhibitor of viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerases, has been identified as a candidate for COVID-19 treatment. However, the therapeutic effect of remdesivir is controversial. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to June 11, 2020 for randomized controlled trials on the clinical efficacy of remdesivir. The main outcomes were discharge rate, mortality, and adverse events. This study is registered at INPLASY (INPLASY202060046). RESULTS Data of 1075 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly increased the discharge rate of patients with COVID-19 compared with the placebo (50.4% vs. 45.29%; relative risk [RR] 1.19 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.34], I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.754). It also significantly decreased mortality (8.18% vs. 12.70%; RR 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44-0.92], I2 = 45.7%, P = 0.175) compared to the placebo. Data of 1296 subjects showed that remdesivir significantly decreased the occurrence of serious adverse events (RR 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.94], I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.716). CONCLUSION Remdesivir is efficacious and safe for the treatment of COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER This study is registered at the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY202060046).

Title: Remdesivir Efficacy in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review Content: Background: Researchers are working hard to find an effective treatment for the new coronavirus 2019. We performed a comprehensive systematic review to investigate the latest clinical evidence on the treatment efficacy and safety of Remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Google scholar, and MedRxiv for relevant observational and interventional studies. Measured outcomes were mortality rates, improvement rates, time to clinical improvement, all adverse event rates and severe adverse event rates. Results: 3 RCTs and 2 cohorts were included in our study. In 2 cohort studies, patients received Remdesivir for 10 days. 2 RCTs evaluated 10-day treatment of Remdesivir efficacy versus placebo group and the other RCT compared its 5-day regimen versus 10-day regimen. Visual inspection of the forest plots revealed that Remdesivir efficacy was not much different in reducing 28-day mortality versus 14-day mortality rates. Besides, 10-day treatment regimen overpowers 5-day treatment and placebo in decreasing time to clinical improvement. All adverse event rates did not have significant difference; however, severe adverse event rate was lower in 5-day Remdesivir group compared to 10-day and placebo groups. Conclusion: 5-day course of Remdesivir therapy in COVID-19 patients is probably efficacious and safe and patients without invasive mechanical ventilation benefit the most. Treatment can be extended to 10 days if satisfactory improvement is not seen by day 5. Most benefits from Remdesivir therapy take place in the first 14 days of the start of the treatment.

Title: Efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo for the treatment of COVID-19: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Content: Background: In spite of the global containment on prevention efforts, the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is continuing to rise, with 1.1 million confirmed cases and 60,124 deaths recorded worldwide since 04 April 2020. The outbreak has a significant threat to international health and economy. At present, there is no approved vaccine or treatment for the disease, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the effectiveness of remdesivir and placebo in patients with COVID-19. Method and analysis: We will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google scholar databases without restriction in year of publication. We will include randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of remdesivir versus placebo for patients confirmed with COVID-19. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA 2015) guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be all cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression, and treatment-emergent adverse events. Two independent authors will perform study selection, data extraction, and methodology quality assessment. RevMan 5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random/fixed effect model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratio for dichotomous outcomes between remdesivir and placebo. Ethics and dissemination: This study does not require ethical approval, because no participants data will be involved in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The findings of this study will be published in reputable and peer-reviewed journal. Registration: This review protocol is submitted in PROSPERO database for registration and we will include the registration number in the revised version of the manuscript. Keywords: 2019 novel coronavirus, 2019-nCoV, Coronavirus diseases 2019, COVID-19, SARS-cov-2, Remdesivir, Randomized Controlled Trials. Systematic review, Meta-analysis, protocol

Title: Advantages of the Parent Nucleoside GS-441524 over Remdesivir for Covid-19 Treatment Content: [Image: see text] While remdesivir has garnered much hope for its moderate anti-Covid-19 effects, its parent nucleoside, GS-441524, has been overlooked. Pharmacokinetic analysis of remdesivir evidences premature serum hydrolysis to GS-441524; GS-441524 is the predominant metabolite reaching the lungs. With its synthetic simplicity and in vivo efficacy in the veterinary setting, we contend that GS-441524 is superior to remdesivir for Covid-19 treatment.

Title: The journey of remdesivir: from Ebola to COVID-19 Content: Countries around the world are currently fighting the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). SARS-CoV-2 is a betacoronavirus, belonging to the same genus as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV. Currently, there are no proven antiviral therapies for COVID-19. Numerous clinical trials have been initiated to identify an effective treatment. One leading candidate is remdesivir (GS-5734), a broad-spectrum antiviral that was initially developed for the treatment of Ebola virus (EBOV). Although remdesivir performed well in preclinical studies, it did not meet efficacy endpoints in a randomized trial conducted during an Ebola outbreak. Remdesivir holds promise for treating COVID-19 based on in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, uncontrolled clinical reports, and limited data from randomized trials. Overall, current data are insufficient to judge the efficacy of remdesivir for COVID-19, and the results of additional randomized studies are eagerly anticipated. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of Ebola and coronavirus outbreaks. We then summarize preclinical and clinical studies of remdesivir for Ebola and COVID-19.

Title: Impacts of remdesivir on dynamics and efficacy stratified by the severity of COVID-19: a simulated two-arm controlled study Content: Background: The impact of remdesivir on length of stay of hospitalization, high-risk state, and death stratified by the severity of COVID-19 at enrollment is controversial. Methods: We applied a simulated two-arm controlled study design to the data on compassionate use of remdesivir as a secondary analysis. Dynamics of risk states and death from COVID-19 patients defined by the six-point disease severity recommended by the WHO R&D and the time to discharge from hospital were used to evaluate the efficacy of remdesivir treatment compared with standard care. Results: Stratified by the risk state at enrollment, low-risk patients exhibited the highest efficacy of remdesivir in reducing subsequent progression to high-risk state by 67% (relative risk (RR)=0.33,95% CI: 0.30-0.35) and further to death by 55% (RR=0.45, 95%CI: 0.39-0.50). For the medium-risk patients, less but still statistically significant efficacy results were noted in reducing progression to high-risk state by 52% (RR=0.48, 95% CI: 0.45-0.51) and further to death by 40% (RR=0.60, 95% CI:0.54-0.66). High-risk state patients treated with remdesivir led to a 25% statistically significant reduction in death (RR=0.75, 95% CI: 0.69-0.82). Regarding the outcome of discharge, remdesivir treatment was most effective for medium-risk patients at enrollment (RR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.35-1.47) followed by high- (RR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.27-1.42) and low-risk patients (RR=1.28, 95% CI: 1.25-1.31). Conclusion: Our results with a simulated two-arm controlled study have provided a new insight into the precision treatment of remdesivir for COVID-19 patients based on risk-stratified efficacy.

Title: Remdesivir for Treatment of COVID-19: Combination of Pulmonary and IV Administration May Offer Aditional Benefit Content: Remdesivir is one of the most promising drugs to treat COVID-19 based on the following facts: remdesivir has a broad-spectrum antiviral mechanism of action; it demonstrated in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 and in vivo efficacy in animal models against the similar coronavirus MERS-CoV; its safety profile has been tested in Ebola patients and in compassionate use in COVID-19 patients. Currently, remdesivir is being investigated in ten randomized controlled trials against COVID-19. The dose regimen of remdesivir is an IV loading dose of 200 mg on day 1 followed by daily IV maintenance doses of 100 mg for 5–9 days. Based on our data analysis, however, remdesivir with IV administration alone is unlikely to achieve excellent clinical efficacy. This analysis is based on the following observations: plasma exposures of remdesivir and its active metabolite are unlikely to be correlated with its clinical efficacy; remdesivir and its active metabolites are unlikely to be adequate in the lung to kill the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Even if remdesivir demonstrates benefits in the current randomized controlled trials, its efficacy may be limited. We suggest that a combination of an IV and pulmonary delivery dose regimen should be studied immediately to realize a potentially more effective antiviral therapy against COVID-19. [Figure: see text]

Title: Remdesivir for Treatment of COVID-19: Combination of Pulmonary and IV Administration May Offer Aditional Benefit Content: Remdesivir is one of the most promising drugs to treat COVID-19 based on the following facts: remdesivir has a broad-spectrum antiviral mechanism of action; it demonstrated in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 and in vivo efficacy in animal models against the similar coronavirus MERS-CoV; its safety profile has been tested in Ebola patients and in compassionate use in COVID-19 patients. Currently, remdesivir is being investigated in ten randomized controlled trials against COVID-19. The dose regimen of remdesivir is an IV loading dose of 200 mg on day 1 followed by daily IV maintenance doses of 100 mg for 5-9 days. Based on our data analysis, however, remdesivir with IV administration alone is unlikely to achieve excellent clinical efficacy. This analysis is based on the following observations: plasma exposures of remdesivir and its active metabolite are unlikely to be correlated with its clinical efficacy; remdesivir and its active metabolites are unlikely to be adequate in the lung to kill the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Even if remdesivir demonstrates benefits in the current randomized controlled trials, its efficacy may be limited. We suggest that a combination of an IV and pulmonary delivery dose regimen should be studied immediately to realize a potentially more effective antiviral therapy against COVID-19. Graphical abstract.

Title: Remdesivir use in patients with coronavirus COVID-19 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis Content: Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, has led to significant global mortality and morbidity. Until now, no treatment has proven to be effective in COVID-19. To explore whether the use of remdesivir, initially an experimental broad-spectrum antiviral, is effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating its use. Methods A rapid search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE medical databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials. A systematic approach was used to screen, abstract, and critically appraise the studies. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was applied to rate the certainty and quality of the evidence reported per study. Results Two RCTs studies were identified (n=1,299). A fixed-effects meta-analysis revealed reductions in mortality (RR=0.69, 0.49 to 0.99), time to clinical improvement (3.95 less days, from 3.86 days less to 4.05 less days ), serious adverse events (RR=0.77, 0.63 to 0.94) and all adverse events (RR=0.87, 0.79 to 0.96). Conclusion In this rapid systematic review, we present pooled evidence from the 2 included RCT studies that reveal that remdesivir has a modest yet significant reduction in mortality and significantly improves the time to recovery, as well as significantly reduced risk in adverse events and serious adverse events. It is more than likely that as an antiviral, remdesivir is not sufficient on its own and may be suitable in combination with other antivirals or treatments such as convalescent plasma. Research is ongoing to clarify and contextual these promising findings.

Title: Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Content: BACKGROUND: No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2-10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir-ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. FINDINGS: Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87-1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95-2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. INTERPRETATION: In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. FUNDING: Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Title: Delayed Initiation of Remdesivir in a COVID-19-Positive Patient Content: We present a case of late initiation of remdesivir antiviral therapy in the successful treatment of a patient with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a mixed medical intensive care unit of a community teaching hospital. A previously healthy 40-year-old man was admitted to the hospital 3 days after the onset of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms including dry cough, fever, and shortness of breath progressing to intubation and increased mechanical ventilator support. A request for compassionate use remdesivir was submitted on the same hospital day as the positive COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction result. Supportive measures, in addition to a 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine, were maintained until remdesivir could be supplied on day 9 of hospitalization, 13 days after symptom onset. Sixty hours after initiating remdesivir, the patient was successfully extubated and able to transition to room air within 24 hours of extubation. Late initiation of remdesivir may be effective in treating SARS-CoV-2, unlike antivirals utilized for different disease states, such as oseltamivir, that are most effective when started as soon as possible following symptom onset. Urgent action is needed by regulatory agencies to work with drug manufacturers to expedite the study and approval of investigational agents targeting SARS-CoV-2 as well as to meet manufacturing demands.

Title: Delayed Initiation of Remdesivir in a COVID‐19‐Positive Patient Content: We present a case of late initiation of remdesivir antiviral therapy in the successful treatment of a patient with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) in a mixed medical intensive care unit of a community teaching hospital. A previously healthy 40‐year‐old man was admitted to the hospital 3 days after the onset of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) symptoms including dry cough, fever, and shortness of breath progressing to intubation and increased mechanical ventilator support. A request for compassionate use remdesivir was submitted on the same hospital day as the positive COVID‐19 polymerase chain reaction result. Supportive measures, in addition to a 5‐day course of hydroxychloroquine, were maintained until remdesivir could be supplied on day 9 of hospitalization, 13 days after symptom onset. Sixty hours after initiating remdesivir, the patient was successfully extubated and able to transition to room air within 24 hours of extubation. Late initiation of remdesivir may be effective in treating SARS‐CoV‐2, unlike antivirals utilized for different disease states, such as oseltamivir, that are most effective when started as soon as possible following symptom onset. Urgent action is needed by regulatory agencies to work with drug manufacturers to expedite the study and approval of investigational agents targeting SARS‐CoV‐2 as well as to meet manufacturing demands.

Title: Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Content: Summary Background No specific antiviral drug has been proven effective for treatment of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue prodrug, has inhibitory effects on pathogenic animal and human coronaviruses, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in vitro, and inhibits Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1, and SARS-CoV-2 replication in animal models. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at ten hospitals in Hubei, China. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, with an interval from symptom onset to enrolment of 12 days or less, oxygen saturation of 94% or less on room air or a ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen of 300 mm Hg or less, and radiologically confirmed pneumonia. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1 followed by 100 mg on days 2–10 in single daily infusions) or the same volume of placebo infusions for 10 days. Patients were permitted concomitant use of lopinavir–ritonavir, interferons, and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was time to clinical improvement up to day 28, defined as the time (in days) from randomisation to the point of a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status (from 1=discharged to 6=death) or discharged alive from hospital, whichever came first. Primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety analysis was done in all patients who started their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04257656. Findings Between Feb 6, 2020, and March 12, 2020, 237 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment group (158 to remdesivir and 79 to placebo); one patient in the placebo group who withdrew after randomisation was not included in the ITT population. Remdesivir use was not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement (hazard ratio 1·23 [95% CI 0·87–1·75]). Although not statistically significant, patients receiving remdesivir had a numerically faster time to clinical improvement than those receiving placebo among patients with symptom duration of 10 days or less (hazard ratio 1·52 [0·95–2·43]). Adverse events were reported in 102 (66%) of 155 remdesivir recipients versus 50 (64%) of 78 placebo recipients. Remdesivir was stopped early because of adverse events in 18 (12%) patients versus four (5%) patients who stopped placebo early. Interpretation In this study of adult patients admitted to hospital for severe COVID-19, remdesivir was not associated with statistically significant clinical benefits. However, the numerical reduction in time to clinical improvement in those treated earlier requires confirmation in larger studies. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Emergency Project of COVID-19, National Key Research and Development Program of China, the Beijing Science and Technology Project.

Title: Early experience with remdesivir in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia Content: At present, there is no definitive antiviral treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe our early experience with remdesivir in four critically ill COVID-19 patients. Patients received a 200 mg loading dose, followed by 100 mg daily intravenously for up to 10 days. All patients had been previously treated with other antivirals before remdesivir initiation. One patient experienced a torsade de pointes requiring cardiac resuscitation and one died due to multiple organ failure. Three patients showed biochemical signs of liver injury. Lymphocyte count increased in all patients soon after remdesivir initiation. Nasal swab SARS-CoV-2 RNA became negative in three of four patients after 3 days of therapy. We observed an in vivo virological effect of remdesivir in four critically ill, COVID-19 patients, coupled with a significant burden of adverse events. Although limited by the low number of subjects studied, our preliminary experience may be relevant for clinicians treating COVID-19.

Title: Role of 1’-Ribose Cyano Substitution for Remdesivir to Effectively Inhibit both Nucleotide Addition and Proofreading in SARS-CoV-2 Viral RNA Replication Content: COVID-19 has recently caused a global health crisis and an effective interventional therapy is urgently needed. SARS-CoV-2 RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) provides a promising but challenging drug target due to its intrinsic proofreading exoribonuclease (ExoN) function. Nucleoside triphosphate (NTP) analogues added to the growing RNA chain should supposedly terminate viral RNA replication, but ExoN can cleave the incorporated compounds and counteract their efficacy. Remdesivir targeting SARS-CoV-2 RdRp exerts high drug efficacy in vitro and in vivo. However, its underlying inhibitory mechanisms remain elusive. Here, we performed all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations with an accumulated simulation time of 12.6 microseconds to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying the inhibitory effects of remdesivir in nucleotide addition (RdRp complex: nsp12-nsp7-nsp8) and proofreading (ExoN complex: nsp14-nsp10). We found that the 1’-cyano group of remdesivir possesses the dual role of inhibiting both nucleotide addition and proofreading. For nucleotide addition, we showed that incorporation of one remdesivir is not sufficient to terminate RNA synthesis. Instead, the presence of the polar 1’-cyano group of remdesivir at an upstream site causes instability via its electrostatic interactions with a salt bridge formed by Asp865 and Lys593, rendering translocation unfavourable. This may eventually lead to a delayed chain termination of RNA extension by three nucleotides. For proofreading, remdesivir can inhibit cleavage via the steric clash between the 1’-cyano group and Asn104. To further examine the role of 1’-cyano group in remdesivir’s inhibitory effects, we studied three additional NTP analogues with other types of modifications: favipiravir, vidarabine, and fludarabine. Our simulations suggest that all three of them are prone to ExoN cleavage. Our computational findings were further supported by an in vitro assay in Vero E6 cells using live SARS-CoV-2. The dose-response curves suggest that among tested NTP analogues, only remdesivir exerts significant inhibitory effects on viral replication. Our work provides plausible mechanisms at molecular level on how remdesivir inhibits viral RNA replication, and our findings may guide rational design for new treatments of COVID-19 targeting viral replication.

Title: Remdesivir: A Review of Its Discovery and Development Leading to Emergency Use Authorization for Treatment of COVID-19 Content: [Image: see text] The global pandemic of SARS-CoV-2, the causative viral pathogen of COVID-19, has driven the biomedical community to action—to uncover and develop antiviral interventions. One potential therapeutic approach currently being evaluated in numerous clinical trials is the agent remdesivir, which has endured a long and winding developmental path. Remdesivir is a nucleotide analogue prodrug that perturbs viral replication, originally evaluated in clinical trials to thwart the Ebola outbreak in 2014. Subsequent evaluation by numerous virology laboratories demonstrated the ability of remdesivir to inhibit coronavirus replication, including SARS-CoV-2. Here, we provide an overview of remdesivir’s discovery, mechanism of action, and the current studies exploring its clinical effectiveness.

Title: Structural Basis of the Potential Binding Mechanism of Remdesivir to SARS-CoV-2 RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Content: [Image: see text] Starting from late 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a once-in-a-century pandemic with deadly consequences, which urgently calls for new treatments, cures, and supporting apparatuses. Recently, because of its positive results in clinical trials, remdesivir was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat COVID-19 through Emergency Use Authorization. Here, we used molecular dynamics simulations and free energy perturbation methods to study the inhibition mechanism of remdesivir to its target SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). We first constructed the homology model of this polymerase based on a previously available structure of SARS-CoV NSP12 RdRp (with a sequence identity of 95.8%). We then built a putative preinsertion binding structure by aligning the remdesivir + RdRp complex to the ATP bound poliovirus RdRp without the RNA template. The putative binding structure was further optimized with molecular dynamics simulations. The resulting stable preinsertion state of remdesivir appeared to form hydrogen bonds with the RNA template when aligned with the newly solved cryo-EM structure of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp. The relative binding free energy between remdesivir and ATP was calculated to be −2.80 ± 0.84 kcal/mol, where remdesivir bound much stronger to SARS-CoV-2 RdRp than the natural substrate ATP. The ∼100-fold improvement in the K(d) from remdesivir over ATP indicates an effective replacement of ATP in blocking of the RdRp preinsertion site. Key residues D618, S549, and R555 are found to be the contributors to the binding affinity of remdesivir. These findings suggest that remdesivir can potentially act as a SARS-CoV-2 RNA-chain terminator, effectively stopping its RNA replication, with key residues also identified for future lead optimization and/or drug resistance studies.

Title: Structural Basis of the Potential Binding Mechanism of Remdesivir to SARS-CoV-2 RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Content: Starting from late 2019, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a once-in-a-century pandemic with deadly consequences, which urgently calls for new treatments, cures, and supporting apparatuses. Recently, because of its positive results in clinical trials, remdesivir was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat COVID-19 through Emergency Use Authorization. Here, we used molecular dynamics simulations and free energy perturbation methods to study the inhibition mechanism of remdesivir to its target SARS-CoV-2 virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). We first constructed the homology model of this polymerase based on a previously available structure of SARS-CoV NSP12 RdRp (with a sequence identity of 95.8%). We then built a putative preinsertion binding structure by aligning the remdesivir + RdRp complex to the ATP bound poliovirus RdRp without the RNA template. The putative binding structure was further optimized with molecular dynamics simulations. The resulting stable preinsertion state of remdesivir appeared to form hydrogen bonds with the RNA template when aligned with the newly solved cryo-EM structure of SARS-CoV-2 RdRp. The relative binding free energy between remdesivir and ATP was calculated to be -2.80 ± 0.84 kcal/mol, where remdesivir bound much stronger to SARS-CoV-2 RdRp than the natural substrate ATP. The â¼100-fold improvement in the Kd from remdesivir over ATP indicates an effective replacement of ATP in blocking of the RdRp preinsertion site. Key residues D618, S549, and R555 are found to be the contributors to the binding affinity of remdesivir. These findings suggest that remdesivir can potentially act as a SARS-CoV-2 RNA-chain terminator, effectively stopping its RNA replication, with key residues also identified for future lead optimization and/or drug resistance studies.

Title: Current Evidence of the Pharmacological Treatments for Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) A Scoping Review Content: Background: As of May 2 2020, 3,267,184 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 229,971 COVID-19-caused deaths have been reported worldwide. Currently, there is limited clarity on the pharmacological treatments available for the novel coronavirus. We systematically identified the current evidence and ongoing research on the pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a scoping review using PRISMA-ScR. Observational studies, including cohort studies and case series, as well as experimental studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were searched electronically on April 7, 2020 and by hand on May 1, 2020. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched along with seven trial registries. The inclusion criteria were patients with confirmed COVID-19 who received pharmacological therapies, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, remdesivir, tocilizumab, and favipiravir. Results: We identified 222 studies on pharmacological treatment of the novel coronavirus. We included 11 of these studies in this review, including the ones on hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine (one cohort), lopinavir/ritonavir (one RCT, three cohorts, and two case series), remdesivir (one RCT and one case series), tocilizumab (one case series), and favipiravir (one RCT). In the three RCTs carried out in China, both lopinavir/ritonavir and remdesivir did not show any significant earlier clinical improvement in case of severe infection [Hazard ratio (HR): 1.31, p=0.09 and HR: 1.24, p=0.24, respectively], The clinical recovery rate on day seven was not significantly different between the favipiravir and arbidol groups (p=0.14) for moderate patients, although the duration of pyrexia and cough in the favipiravir group was significantly shorter as compared to the arbidol group (p<0.01). There are 135 ongoing RCTs, including 72 for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, 29 for lopinavir/ritonavir, 14 for remdesivir, 16 for tocilizumab, and 4 for favipiravir. Conclusion: The clinical effectiveness and safety of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 remains unclear owing to the lack of large, high-quality RCTs. However, in the event of emerging infectious diseases, we need to repeatedly and systematically update the best available evidence to avoid misleading information.

Title: Case reports study of the first five patients COVID-19 treated with remdesivir in France Content: Abstract The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been identified as responsible for the COVID-19 outbreak worldwide. Data on treatment are scare and parallels are made between SARS-CoV-2 and other coronavirus. Remdesivir is a broad spectrum antiviral with efficient in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 and controversial evidence of clinical improvement in severe COVID-19 patients. We aimed to describe the clinical outcome and virological monitoring of the first five COVID-19 patients admitted in ICU for severe pneumonia related to SARS-CoV-2 and treated with remdesivir in the University hospital of Bichat, Paris, France. SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR in blood plasma, lower and upper respiratory tract were monitored. Among the five treated patients, two needed mechanical ventilation and one high flow cannula oxygen. A significant decrease in SARS-CoV-2 viral load from upper respiratory tract was observed in most cases but two died with active SARS-CoV-2 replication in the lower respiratory tract. Plasma samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 in only one patient. Remdesivir was interrupted for side effects among four patients, including 2 ALT elevations (3 to 5 N) and 2 renal failures requiring renal replacement. This case series of five COVID-19 patients requiring ICU for a respiratory distress and treated with remdesivir, highlights the complexity of remdesivir use in such critically ill patients.

Title: Case reports study of the first five patients COVID-19 treated with remdesivir in France Content: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been identified as responsible for the COVID-19 outbreak worldwide. Data on treatment are scare and parallels are made between SARS-CoV-2 and other coronavirus. Remdesivir is a broad spectrum antiviral with efficient in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 and controversial evidence of clinical improvement in severe COVID-19 patients. We aimed to describe the clinical outcome and virological monitoring of the first five COVID-19 patients admitted in ICU for severe pneumonia related to SARS-CoV-2 and treated with remdesivir in the University hospital of Bichat, Paris, France. SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR in blood plasma, lower and upper respiratory tract were monitored. Among the five treated patients, two needed mechanical ventilation and one high flow cannula oxygen. A significant decrease in SARS-CoV-2 viral load from upper respiratory tract was observed in most cases but two died with active SARS-CoV-2 replication in the lower respiratory tract. Plasma samples were positive for SARS-CoV-2 in only one patient. Remdesivir was interrupted for side effects among four patients, including 2 ALT elevations (3 to 5 N) and 2 renal failures requiring renal replacement. This case series of five COVID-19 patients requiring ICU for a respiratory distress and treated with remdesivir, highlights the complexity of remdesivir use in such critically ill patients.

Title: Tocilizumab and Remdesivir in a Pregnant Patient With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Content: BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding treatment options for pregnant women with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). CASE: A 35-year-old primigravid patient at 22 weeks of gestation presented with 7 days of fever, cough, anosmia, and dyspnea. Nasopharyngeal swab was positive for the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and a chest X-ray demonstrated bilateral patchy infiltrates. Laboratory evaluation was notable for marked elevation of interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein concentrations. On hospital day 3, owing to increased dyspnea and oxygen requirement, the patient was treated with tocilizumab followed by 5 days of remdesivir. She responded well, recovered to room air, and was discharged home after a 9-day hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Tocilizumab and remdesivir may be effective for treatment of severe COVID-19 in pregnancy, but additional data are needed to guide risk-benefit considerations.

Title: Tocilizumab and Remdesivir in a Pregnant Patient With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Content: BACKGROUND There are limited data regarding treatment options for pregnant women with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). CASE A 35-year-old primigravid patient at 22 weeks of gestation presented with 7 days of fever, cough, anosmia, and dyspnea. Nasopharyngeal swab was positive for the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and a chest X-ray demonstrated bilateral patchy infiltrates. Laboratory evaluation was notable for marked elevation of interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein concentrations. On hospital day 3, owing to increased dyspnea and oxygen requirement, the patient was treated with tocilizumab followed by 5 days of remdesivir. She responded well, recovered to room air, and was discharged home after a 9-day hospitalization. CONCLUSION Tocilizumab and remdesivir may be effective for treatment of severe COVID-19 in pregnancy, but additional data are needed to guide risk-benefit considerations.

Title: Repurposing Therapeutics for Potential Treatment of SARS-CoV-2: A Review Content: The need for proven disease-specific treatments for the novel pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 necessitates a worldwide search for therapeutic options. Since the SARS-CoV-2 virus shares extensive homology with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, effective therapies for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV may also have therapeutic potential for the current COVID-19 outbreak. To identify therapeutics that might be repositioned for treatment of the SARS-CoV-2 disease COVID-19, we strategically reviewed the literature to identify existing therapeutics with evidence of efficacy for the treatment of the three coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory illness (SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2). Mechanistic and in vitro analyses suggest multiple promising therapeutic options with potential for repurposing to treat patients with COVID-19. Therapeutics with particularly high potential efficacy for repurposing include camostat mesylate, remdesivir, favipiravir, tocilizumab, baricitinib, convalescent plasma, and humanized monoclonal antibodies. Camostat mesylate has shown therapeutic potential, likely by preventing viral entry into epithelial cells. In early research, the targeted antivirals remdesivir and favipiravir appear to benefit patients by decreasing viral replication; clinical trials suggest that remdesivir speeds recovery from COVID-19. Tocilizumab and baricitinib appear to improve mortality by preventing a severe cytokine storm. Convalescent plasma and humanized monoclonal antibodies offer passive immunity and decreased recovery time. This review highlights potential therapeutic options that may be repurposed to treat COVID-19 and suggests opportunities for further research.

Title: Repurposing Therapeutics for Potential Treatment of SARS-CoV-2: A Review. Content: The need for proven disease-specific treatments for the novel pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 necessitates a worldwide search for therapeutic options. Since the SARS-CoV-2 virus shares extensive homology with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, effective therapies for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV may also have therapeutic potential for the current COVID-19 outbreak. To identify therapeutics that might be repositioned for treatment of the SARS-CoV-2 disease COVID-19, we strategically reviewed the literature to identify existing therapeutics with evidence of efficacy for the treatment of the three coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory illness (SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2). Mechanistic and in vitro analyses suggest multiple promising therapeutic options with potential for repurposing to treat patients with COVID-19. Therapeutics with particularly high potential efficacy for repurposing include camostat mesylate, remdesivir, favipiravir, tocilizumab, baricitinib, convalescent plasma, and humanized monoclonal antibodies. Camostat mesylate has shown therapeutic potential, likely by preventing viral entry into epithelial cells. In early research, the targeted antivirals remdesivir and favipiravir appear to benefit patients by decreasing viral replication; clinical trials suggest that remdesivir speeds recovery from COVID-19. Tocilizumab and baricitinib appear to improve mortality by preventing a severe cytokine storm. Convalescent plasma and humanized monoclonal antibodies offer passive immunity and decreased recovery time. This review highlights potential therapeutic options that may be repurposed to treat COVID-19 and suggests opportunities for further research.

Title: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review. Content: Importance The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

Title: Pharmacologic Treatments for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review Content: Importance: The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents an unprecedented challenge to identify effective drugs for prevention and treatment. Given the rapid pace of scientific discovery and clinical data generated by the large number of people rapidly infected by SARS-CoV-2, clinicians need accurate evidence regarding effective medical treatments for this infection. Observations: No proven effective therapies for this virus currently exist. The rapidly expanding knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 virology provides a significant number of potential drug targets. The most promising therapy is remdesivir. Remdesivir has potent in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but it is not US Food and Drug Administration approved and currently is being tested in ongoing randomized trials. Oseltamivir has not been shown to have efficacy, and corticosteroids are currently not recommended. Current clinical evidence does not support stopping angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: The COVID-19 pandemic represents the greatest global public health crisis of this generation and, potentially, since the pandemic influenza outbreak of 1918. The speed and volume of clinical trials launched to investigate potential therapies for COVID-19 highlight both the need and capability to produce high-quality evidence even in the middle of a pandemic. No therapies have been shown effective to date.

Title: A search for medications to treat COVID-19 via in silico molecular docking models of the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and 3CL protease Content: BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 has now been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. There is an emergent need to search for possible medications. METHOD: Utilization of the available sequence information, homology modeling, and in slico docking a number of available medications might prove to be effective in inhibiting the SARS-CoV-2 two main drug targets, the spike glycoprotein, and the 3CL protease. RESULTS: Several compounds were determined from the in silico docking models that might prove to be effective inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2. Several antiviral medications: Zanamivir, Indinavir, Saquinavir, and Remdesivir show potential as and 3CLPRO main proteinase inhibitors and as a treatment for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Zanamivir, Indinavir, Saquinavir, and Remdesivir are among the exciting hits on the 3CLPRO main proteinase. It is also exciting to uncover that Flavin Adenine Dinucleotide (FAD) Adeflavin, B2 deficiency medicine, and Coenzyme A, a coenzyme, may also be potentially used for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The use of these off-label medications may be beneficial in the treatment of the COVID-19.

Title: Simulated Assessment of Pharmacokinetically Guided Dosing for Investigational Treatments of Pediatric Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Content: Importance: Children of all ages appear susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. To support pediatric clinical studies for investigational treatments of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pediatric-specific dosing is required. Objective: To define pediatric-specific dosing regimens for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir for COVID-19 treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation were used to extrapolate investigated adult dosages toward children (March 2020-April 2020). Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling was used to inform pediatric dosing for hydroxychloroquine. For remdesivir, pediatric dosages were derived using allometric-scaling with age-dependent exponents. Dosing simulations were conducted using simulated pediatric and adult participants based on the demographics of a white US population. Interventions: Simulated drug exposures following a 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine (400 mg every 12 hours × 2 doses followed by 200 mg every 12 hours × 8 doses) and a single 200-mg intravenous dose of remdesivir were computed for simulated adult participants. A simulation-based dose-ranging study was conducted in simulated children exploring different absolute and weight-normalized dosing strategies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome for hydroxychloroquine was average unbound plasma concentrations for 5 treatment days. Additionally, unbound interstitial lung concentrations were simulated. For remdesivir, the primary outcome was plasma exposure (area under the curve, 0 to infinity) following single-dose administration. Results: For hydroxychloroquine, the physiologically based pharmacokinetic model analysis included 500 and 600 simulated white adult and pediatric participants, respectively, and supported weight-normalized dosing for children weighing less than 50 kg. Geometric mean-simulated average unbound plasma concentration values among children within different developmental age groups (32-35 ng/mL) were congruent to adults (32 ng/mL). Simulated unbound hydroxychloroquine concentrations in lung interstitial fluid mirrored those in unbound plasma and were notably lower than in vitro concentrations needed to mediate antiviral activity. For remdesivir, the analysis included 1000 and 6000 simulated adult and pediatric participants, respectively. The proposed pediatric dosing strategy supported weight-normalized dosing for participants weighing less than 60 kg. Geometric mean-simulated plasma area under the time curve 0 to infinity values among children within different developmental age-groups (4315-5027 ng × h/mL) were similar to adults (4398 ng × h/mL). Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis provides pediatric-specific dosing suggestions for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir and raises concerns regarding hydroxychloroquine use for COVID-19 treatment because concentrations were less than those needed to mediate an antiviral effect.

Title: Simulated Assessment of Pharmacokinetically Guided Dosing for Investigational Treatments of Pediatric Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019. Content: Importance Children of all ages appear susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. To support pediatric clinical studies for investigational treatments of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pediatric-specific dosing is required. Objective To define pediatric-specific dosing regimens for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir for COVID-19 treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants Pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation were used to extrapolate investigated adult dosages toward children (March 2020-April 2020). Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling was used to inform pediatric dosing for hydroxychloroquine. For remdesivir, pediatric dosages were derived using allometric-scaling with age-dependent exponents. Dosing simulations were conducted using simulated pediatric and adult participants based on the demographics of a white US population. Interventions Simulated drug exposures following a 5-day course of hydroxychloroquine (400 mg every 12 hours × 2 doses followed by 200 mg every 12 hours × 8 doses) and a single 200-mg intravenous dose of remdesivir were computed for simulated adult participants. A simulation-based dose-ranging study was conducted in simulated children exploring different absolute and weight-normalized dosing strategies. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome for hydroxychloroquine was average unbound plasma concentrations for 5 treatment days. Additionally, unbound interstitial lung concentrations were simulated. For remdesivir, the primary outcome was plasma exposure (area under the curve, 0 to infinity) following single-dose administration. Results For hydroxychloroquine, the physiologically based pharmacokinetic model analysis included 500 and 600 simulated white adult and pediatric participants, respectively, and supported weight-normalized dosing for children weighing less than 50 kg. Geometric mean-simulated average unbound plasma concentration values among children within different developmental age groups (32-35 ng/mL) were congruent to adults (32 ng/mL). Simulated unbound hydroxychloroquine concentrations in lung interstitial fluid mirrored those in unbound plasma and were notably lower than in vitro concentrations needed to mediate antiviral activity. For remdesivir, the analysis included 1000 and 6000 simulated adult and pediatric participants, respectively. The proposed pediatric dosing strategy supported weight-normalized dosing for participants weighing less than 60 kg. Geometric mean-simulated plasma area under the time curve 0 to infinity values among children within different developmental age-groups (4315-5027 ng × h/mL) were similar to adults (4398 ng × h/mL). Conclusions and Relevance This analysis provides pediatric-specific dosing suggestions for hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir and raises concerns regarding hydroxychloroquine use for COVID-19 treatment because concentrations were less than those needed to mediate an antiviral effect.

Title: Emerging Treatment and Prevention Strategies against COVID-19: A Brief Update Content: Patients with novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at significantly increased risk for mortality and morbidity. Current management remains supportive care, ranging from symptomatic outpatient management to full–intensive care support, including intravenous fluids, invasive, and non-invasive oxygen supplementation. In patients with septic shock, treatment with antibiotics and vasopressors are recommended to keep mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mm Hg and lactate < 2 mmol/L. Because of the lack of effectiveness and possible adverse effects, routine corticosteroids should be avoided unless they are indicated for another reason (exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], and septic shock in whom fluids and vasopressors do not restore hemodynamic stability). There is currently no sufficient evidence of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, remdesivir, and other antivirals in the treatment or prevention of COVID-19. Limited evidence shows that COVID-19 convalescent plasma can be used as a treatment of COVID-19 without the occurrence of severe adverse events. Drug regulatory agencies granted an emergency-use authorization of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and remdesivir to treat patients when a clinical trial is not available or participation is not feasible. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are associated with QT interval prolongation and life-threatening cardiac arrhythmia in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Guidelines are issued for use of convalescent plasma in patients with serious or immediately life-threatening COVID-19. Data from several ongoing randomized controlled trials will provide further evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of these drugs for the treatment of COVID-19.

Title: A search for medications to treat COVID-19 via in silico molecular docking models of the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and 3CL protease Content: Abstract Background The COVID-19 has now been declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. There is an emergent need to search for possible medications. Method Utilization of the available sequence information, homology modeling, and in slico docking a number of available medications might prove to be effective in inhibiting the SARS-CoV-2 two main drug targets, the spike glycoprotein, and the 3CL protease. Results Several compounds were determined from the in silico docking models that might prove to be effective inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2. Several antiviral medications: Zanamivir, Indinavir, Saquinavir, and Remdesivir show potential as and 3CLPRO main proteinase inhibitors and as a treatment for COVID-19. Conclusion Zanamivir, Indinavir, Saquinavir, and Remdesivir are among the exciting hits on the 3CLPRO main proteinase. It is also exciting to uncover that Flavin Adenine Dinucleotide (FAD) Adeflavin, B2 deficiency medicine, and Coenzyme A, a coenzyme, may also be potentially used for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The use of these off-label medications may be beneficial in the treatment of the COVID-19.

Title: Current knowledge about the antivirals remdesivir (GS-5734) and GS-441524 as therapeutic options for coronaviruses Content: Abstract Recent international epidemics of coronavirus-associated illnesses underscore the urgent medical and public health need for vaccine development and regulatory body approved therapies. In particular, the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has quickly intensified interest in developing treatment options to mitigate impact on human life. Remdesivir (GS-5734™) is a broad-spectrum antiviral drug that is now being tested as a potential treatment for COVID-19 in international, multi-site clinical trials. Currently available evidence about the antiviral effects of remdesivir against coronaviruses is primarily based on in vitro and in vivo studies (including some on a chemically related compound, GS-441524™), which have demonstrated largely favorable findings. As the pandemic progresses, information from human compassionate use cases will continue to accumulate before the clinical trials are concluded. It is imperative for public health practitioners and the One Health community to stay up to date on the most promising potential therapeutic options that are under investigation. Thus, the purpose of this review is to synthesize the knowledge to date about remdesivir as a therapeutic option for coronaviruses, with a special focus on information relevant to the One Health community.

Title: Efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Content: BACKGROUND: Despite global containment measures to fight the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the pandemic continued to rise, rapidly spread across the world, and resulting in 2.6 million confirmed cases and 185 061 deaths worldwide as of 23 April 2020. Yet, there are no approved vaccines or drugs to make the disease less deadly, while efforts are underway. Remdesivir, a nucleotide-analogue antiviral drug developed for Ebola, is determined to prevent and stop infections with COVID-19, while results are yet controversial. Here, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: We will search MEDLINE-PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google scholar databases for articles published as of 30 June 2020 and we will complete the study on 30 August 2020. We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 guidelines for the design and reporting of the results. We will include RCTs that assessed the efficacy of remdesivir versus placebo or standard of care. The primary endpoint will be time to clinical recovery. The secondary endpoints will be proportion of participants relieved from clinical symptoms defined at the time (in hours) from initiation of the study treatment, all-cause mortality, discharged date, frequency of respiratory progression and treatment-emergent adverse events. RevMan V.5.3 software will be used for statistical analysis. Random effects model will be carried out to calculate mean differences for continuous outcome data and risk ratio for dichotomous outcome data between remdesivir and placebo or standard of care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no ethical considerations associated with this study as we will use publicly available data from previously published studies. We plan to publish results in open-access peer-reviewed journals and present at international and national conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020177953.

Title: COVID-19: The Potential Role of Copper and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in a Combination of Candidate Antiviral Treatments Against SARS-CoV-2 Content: BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a pandemic. Since then, thousands of people have suffered and died, making the need for a treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) more crucial than ever. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors carried out a search in PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) for COVID-19 to provide information on the most promising treatments against SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Possible COVID-19 agents with promising efficacy and favorable safety profile were identified. The results support the combination of copper, N-acetylcysteine (NAC), colchicine and nitric oxide (NO) with candidate antiviral agents, remdesivir or EIDD-2801, as a treatment for patients positive for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: The authors propose to study the effects of the combination of copper, NAC, colchicine, NO and currently used experimental antiviral agents, remdesivir or EIDD-2801, as a potential treatment scheme for SARS-COV-2.

Title: COVID-19: The Potential Role of Copper and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) in a Combination of Candidate Antiviral Treatments Against SARS-CoV-2. Content: BACKGROUND On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a pandemic. Since then, thousands of people have suffered and died, making the need for a treatment of severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) more crucial than ever. MATERIALS AND METHODS The authors carried out a search in PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov and New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) for COVID-19 to provide information on the most promising treatments against SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS Possible COVID-19 agents with promising efficacy and favorable safety profile were identified. The results support the combination of copper, N-acetylcysteine (NAC), colchicine and nitric oxide (NO) with candidate antiviral agents, remdesivir or EIDD-2801, as a treatment for patients positive for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION The authors propose to study the effects of the combination of copper, NAC, colchicine, NO and currently used experimental antiviral agents, remdesivir or EIDD-2801, as a potential treatment scheme for SARS-COV-2.

Title: Remdesivir data offer hope, with caveats Content: Gilead Sciences’ experimental antiviral remdesivir helped people with COVID-19 recover faster, according to limited data released on April 29 from a trial led by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases The Food and Drug Administration is expected in the coming days to take the unprecedented step of issuing an emergency use authorization, which will make the drug more readily available for stockpiling The study by NIAID, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, is considered to be the highest quality among the myriad Phase III trials testing remdesivir’s effectiveness against COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus Unlike most other trials, it includes a placebo arm, a part of a trial’s design that scientists rely on for a clear signal of a treatment’s worth The trial enrolled 1,063 people, 20% of whom received the standard of care rather than remdesivir The primary end point View: PDF ;Full Text HTML

Title: Scaling up remdesivir amid the coronavirus crisis Content: With society clamoring for something—anything—that can stem the rapidly rising death toll of the COVID-19 pandemic, Gilead Sciences’ antiviral remdesivir has emerged as a closely watched treatment option Laboratory studies of other coronaviruses suggested the drug might be able to take down this new one, which causes COVID-19 As the outbreak took hold in China in January, it was among the first treatments that doctors tried Now, with cases worldwide at more than 3 million, scrutiny of data coming out of clinical trials of the drug has reached fever pitch When the health-focused news site Stat posted a story based on a leaked video of a University of Chicago clinician talking optimistically about remdesivir’s possible effectiveness, it didn’t just prop up Gilead’s stock price;it lifted the entire stock market With each new anecdote, whether about an individual patient or a hunch from a doctor running a trial, the pressure View: PDF ;Full Text HTML

Title: Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Preliminary Report Content: BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACCT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Title: Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report Content: BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), none have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 with evidence of lower respiratory tract involvement. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1063 patients underwent randomization. The data and safety monitoring board recommended early unblinding of the results on the basis of findings from an analysis that showed shortened time to recovery in the remdesivir group. Preliminary results from the 1059 patients (538 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo) with data available after randomization indicated that those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 11 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 12), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 19) in those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.55; P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality by 14 days were 7.1% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.04). Serious adverse events were reported for 114 of the 541 patients in the remdesivir group who underwent randomization (21.1%) and 141 of the 522 patients in the placebo group who underwent randomization (27.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.)

Title: Statistical Issues and Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Clinical Trials with Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Remdesivir Content: BACKGROUND: Recently, three randomized clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments were completed, one for lopinavir-ritonavir and two for remdesivir. One trial reported that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery, while the other two showed no benefit of the treatment under investigation. OBJECTIVE: From statistical perspectives, we identify several key issues in the design and analysis of three COVID-19 trials and reanalyze the data from the cumulative incidence curves in the three trials using more appropriate statistical methods. METHODS: The lopinavir-ritonavir trial enrolled 39 additional patients due to insignificant results after the sample size reached the planned number, which led to inflation of the type I error rate. The remdesivir trial of Wang et al. failed to reach the planned sample size due to a lack of eligible patients, while the bootstrap method was used to predict the quantity of clinical interest conditionally and unconditionally if the trial had continued to reach the originally planned sample size. Moreover, we used a terminal (or cure) rate model and a model-free metric known as the restricted mean survival time or the restricted mean time to improvement (RMTI) to analyze the reconstructed data. The remdesivir trial of Beigel et al. reported the median recovery time of the remdesivir and placebo groups and the rate ratio for recovery, while both quantities depend on a particular time point representing local information. We use the restricted mean time to recovery (RMTR) as a global and robust measure for efficacy. RESULTS: For the lopinavir-ritonavir trial, with the increase of sample size from 160 to 199, the type I error rate was inflated from 0.05 to 0.071. The difference of RMTIs between the two groups evaluated at day 28 was -1.67 days (95% CI [-3.62, 0.28]; P=.09) in favor of lopinavir-ritonavir but not statistically significant. For the remdesivir trial of Wang et al., the difference of RMTIs at day 28 was -0.89 day (95% CI [-2.84, 1.06]; P=.37). The planned sample size was 453, yet only 236 patients were enrolled. The conditional prediction shows that the HR estimates would reach statistical significance if the target sample size had been maintained. For the remdesivir trial of Beigel et al., the difference of RMTRs between the remdesivir and placebo groups at day 30 was -2.7 days (95% CI [-4.0, -1.2]; P<.001), confirming the superiority of remdesivir. The difference in the recovery time at the 25th percentile (95% CI [-3, 0]; P=.65) was insignificant, while the differences manifested to be statistically significant at larger percentiles. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the statistical issues and lessons learned from the recent three clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments, we suggest more appropriate approaches for the design and analysis for ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

Title: Statistical Issues and Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Clinical Trials With Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Remdesivir Content: BACKGROUND: Recently, three randomized clinical trials on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) treatments were completed: one for lopinavir-ritonavir and two for remdesivir. One trial reported that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery, while the other two showed no benefit of the treatment under investigation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to, from a statistical perspective, identify several key issues in the design and analysis of three COVID-19 trials and reanalyze the data from the cumulative incidence curves in the three trials using more appropriate statistical methods. METHODS: The lopinavir-ritonavir trial enrolled 39 additional patients due to insignificant results after the sample size reached the planned number, which led to inflation of the type I error rate. The remdesivir trial of Wang et al failed to reach the planned sample size due to a lack of eligible patients, and the bootstrap method was used to predict the quantity of clinical interest conditionally and unconditionally if the trial had continued to reach the originally planned sample size. Moreover, we used a terminal (or cure) rate model and a model-free metric known as the restricted mean survival time or the restricted mean time to improvement (RMTI) to analyze the reconstructed data. The remdesivir trial of Beigel et al reported the median recovery time of the remdesivir and placebo groups, and the rate ratio for recovery, while both quantities depend on a particular time point representing local information. We use the restricted mean time to recovery (RMTR) as a global and robust measure for efficacy. RESULTS: For the lopinavir-ritonavir trial, with the increase of sample size from 160 to 199, the type I error rate was inflated from 0.05 to 0.071. The difference of RMTIs between the two groups evaluated at day 28 was –1.67 days (95% CI –3.62 to 0.28; P=.09) in favor of lopinavir-ritonavir but not statistically significant. For the remdesivir trial of Wang et al, the difference of RMTIs at day 28 was –0.89 days (95% CI –2.84 to 1.06; P=.37). The planned sample size was 453, yet only 236 patients were enrolled. The conditional prediction shows that the hazard ratio estimates would reach statistical significance if the target sample size had been maintained. For the remdesivir trial of Beigel et al, the difference of RMTRs between the remdesivir and placebo groups at day 30 was –2.7 days (95% CI –4.0 to –1.2; P<.001), confirming the superiority of remdesivir. The difference in the recovery time at the 25th percentile (95% CI –3 to 0; P=.65) was insignificant, while the differences became more statistically significant at larger percentiles. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the statistical issues and lessons learned from the recent three clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments, we suggest more appropriate approaches for the design and analysis of ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

Title: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of intravenous remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19: study protocol for a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Content: BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel corinavirus (later named SARS-CoV-2 virus), was fistly reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019. Large-scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30th January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in vitro and in vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenously administered remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 = discharged; 6 = death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required has been observed. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in COVID-19. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6th February 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04257656. Registered on 6 February 2020.

Title: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of intravenous remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19: study protocol for a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial Content: BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by a novel corinavirus (later named SARS-CoV-2 virus), was fistly reported in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China towards the end of 2019. Large-scale spread within China and internationally led the World Health Organization to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30(th) January 2020. The clinical manifestations of COVID-19 virus infection include asymptomatic infection, mild upper respiratory symptoms, severe viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and even death. There are no antivirals of proven clinical efficacy in coronavirus infections. Remdesivir (GS-5734), a nucleoside analogue, has inhibitory effects on animal and human highly pathogenic coronaviruses, including MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV, in in vitro and in vivo experiments. It is also inhibitory against the COVID-19 virus in vitro. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of remdesivir in adult patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Adults (≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 virus infection, severe pneumonia signs or symptoms, and radiologically confirmed severe pneumonia are randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to intravenously administered remdesivir or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint is time to clinical improvement (censored at day 28), defined as the time (in days) from randomization of study treatment (remdesivir or placebo) until a decline of two categories on a six-category ordinal scale of clinical status (1 = discharged; 6 = death) or live discharge from hospital. One interim analysis for efficacy and futility will be conducted once half of the total number of events required has been observed. DISCUSSION: This is the first randomized, placebo-controlled trial in COVID-19. Enrolment began in sites in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China on 6(th) February 2020. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04257656. Registered on 6 February 2020.

Title: Current pharmacological treatments for SARS-COV-2: A narrative review Content: The novel coronavirus, later identified as SARS-CoV-2, originating from Wuhan in China in November 2019, quickly spread around the world becoming a pandemic. Despite the knowledge of previous coronaviruses, such as those responsible for the SARS and MERS-CoV epidemic, there is no drug or prophylaxis treatment to this day. The rapid succession of scientific findings on SARS-CoV-2 provides a significant number of potential drug targets. Nevertheless, at the same time, the high quantity of clinical data, generated by a large number of rapidly infected people, require accurate tests regarding effective medical treatments. Several in vitro and in vivo studies were rapidly initiated after the outbreak of the pandemic COVID-19. Initial clinical studies revealed the promising potential of remdesivir that demonstrated a powerful and specific in vitro antiviral activity for COVID-19. Promising effects appear to be attributable to hydroxychloroquine. Remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine are being tested in ongoing randomized trials. In contrast, oseltamivir was not effective and corticosteroids are not currently recommended. However, few data from ongoing clinical trials are identifying low molecular weight heparins, innate immune system stimulating agents, and inflammatory modulating agents as potential effective agents. The authors assume that the current pandemic will determine the need for a systematic approach based on big data analysis for identifying effective drugs to defeat SARS-Cov-2. This work is aimed to be a general reference point and to provide an overview as comprehensive as possible regarding the main clinical trials in progress at the moment.

Title: Remdesivir in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a simplified summary Content: The pandemic of COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease-2019) is an extremely contagious respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. Certain drugs have several protein targets and many illnesses share overlapping molecular paths. In such cases, reusing drugs for more than one objective and finding their novice uses can considerably decrease the time in finding new cures for unforeseen diseases. Remdesivir has been recently a strong candidate for the treatment of Covid-19. In this commentary, we have portrayed the structure of the coronavirus in a simple way as well as the site where remdesivir acts. We have also displayed the ongoing clinical trials, as well as a published study that was conducted on compassionate base. The covid-19 pandemic might wean down by the end of summer 2020, but the risk of seasonality exists. Therefore, future disposal of agents such as remdesivir might be crucial for ensuring an efficient treatment, decrease mortality and allow early discharge. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

Title: In vitro evaluation of antiviral activity of single and combined repurposable drugs against SARS-CoV-2 Content: In response to the current pandemic caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2, identifying and validating effective therapeutic strategies is more than ever necessary. We evaluated the in vitro antiviral activities of a shortlist of compounds, known for their cellular broad-spectrum activities, together with drugs that are currently under evaluation in clinical trials for COVID-19 patients. We report the antiviral effect of remdesivir, lopinavir, chloroquine, umifenovir, berberine and cyclosporine A in Vero E6 cells model of SARS-CoV-2 infection, with estimated 50% inhibitory concentrations of 0.99, 5.2, 1.38, 3.5, 10.6 and 3 μM, respectively. Virus-directed plus host-directed drug combinations were also investigated. We report a strong antagonism between remdesivir and berberine, in contrast with remdesivir/diltiazem, for which we describe high levels of synergy, with mean Loewe synergy scores of 12 and peak values above 50. Combination of host-directed drugs with direct acting antivirals underscore further validation in more physiological models, yet they open up interesting avenues for the treatment of COVID-19.

Title: Development and validation of a UHPLC-MS/MS method for quantification of the prodrug remdesivir and its metabolite GS-441524: a tool for clinical pharmacokinetics of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 and Ebola virus disease Content: BACKGROUND: Remdesivir has received significant attention for its potential application in the treatment of COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2. Remdesivir has already been tested for Ebola virus disease treatment and found to have activity against SARS and MERS coronaviruses. The remdesivir core contains GS-441524, which interferes with RNA-dependent RNA polymerases alone. In non-human primates, following IV administration, remdesivir is rapidly distributed into PBMCs and converted within 2 h to the active nucleoside triphosphate form, while GS-441524 is detectable in plasma for up to 24 h. Nevertheless, remdesivir pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in humans are still unexplored, highlighting the need for a precise analytical method for remdesivir and GS-441524 quantification. OBJECTIVES: The validation of a reliable UHPLC-MS/MS method for remdesivir and GS-441524 quantification in human plasma. METHODS: Remdesivir and GS-441524 standards and quality controls were prepared in plasma from healthy donors. Sample preparation consisted of protein precipitation, followed by dilution and injection into the QSight 220 UHPLC-MS/MS system. Chromatographic separation was obtained through an Acquity HSS T3 1.8 μm, 2.1 × 50 mm column, with a gradient of water and acetonitrile with 0.05% formic acid. The method was validated using EMA and FDA guidelines. RESULTS: Analyte stability has been evaluated and described in detail. The method successfully fulfilled the validation process and it was demonstrated that, when possible, sample thermal inactivation could be a good choice in order to improve biosafety. CONCLUSIONS: This method represents a useful tool for studying remdesivir and GS-441524 clinical pharmacokinetics, particularly during the current COVID-19 outbreak.

Title: Development and validation of a UHPLC-MS/MS method for quantification of the prodrug remdesivir and its metabolite GS-441524: a tool for clinical pharmacokinetics of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 and Ebola virus disease Content: BACKGROUND: Remdesivir has received significant attention for its potential application in the treatment of COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2. Remdesivir has already been tested for Ebola virus disease treatment and found to have activity against SARS and MERS coronaviruses. The remdesivir core contains GS-441524, which interferes with RNA-dependent RNA polymerases alone. In non-human primates, following IV administration, remdesivir is rapidly distributed into PBMCs and converted within 2 h to the active nucleoside triphosphate form, while GS-441524 is detectable in plasma for up to 24 h. Nevertheless, remdesivir pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in humans are still unexplored, highlighting the need for a precise analytical method for remdesivir and GS-441524 quantification. OBJECTIVES: The validation of a reliable UHPLC-MS/MS method for remdesivir and GS-441524 quantification in human plasma. METHODS: Remdesivir and GS-441524 standards and quality controls were prepared in plasma from healthy donors. Sample preparation consisted of protein precipitation, followed by dilution and injection into the QSight 220 UHPLC-MS/MS system. Chromatographic separation was obtained through an Acquity HSS T3 1.8 µm, 2.1â×â50 mm column, with a gradient of water and acetonitrile with 0.05% formic acid. The method was validated using EMA and FDA guidelines. RESULTS: Analyte stability has been evaluated and described in detail. The method successfully fulfilled the validation process and it was demonstrated that, when possible, sample thermal inactivation could be a good choice in order to improve biosafety. CONCLUSIONS: This method represents a useful tool for studying remdesivir and GS-441524 clinical pharmacokinetics, particularly during the current COVID-19 outbreak.

Title: Characterization and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 in nasal and bronchial human airway epithelia Content: In the current COVID-19 pandemic context, proposing and validating effective treatments represents a major challenge. However, the lack of biologically relevant pre-clinical experimental models of SARS-CoV-2 infection as a complement of classic cell lines represents a major barrier for scientific and medical progress. Here, we advantageously used human reconstituted airway epithelial models of nasal or bronchial origin to characterize viral infection kinetics, tissue-level remodeling of the cellular ultrastructure and transcriptional immune signatures induced by SARS-CoV-2. Our results underline the relevance of this model for the preclinical evaluation of antiviral candidates. Foremost, we provide evidence on the antiviral efficacy of remdesivir and the therapeutic potential of the remdesivir-diltiazem combination as a rapidly available option to respond to the current unmet medical need imposed by COVID-19. One Sentence Summary New insights on SARS-CoV-2 biology and drug combination therapies against COVID-19.

Title: Antivirals for COVID-19. Content: Drugs targeting RNA respiratory viruses has resulted in few effective therapies, highlighting challenges for antivirals to treat COVID-19. Several antivirals are being investigated for symptomatic COVID-19 but no definitive data support their clinical use. Remdesivir, with good in vitro activity against SARS-CoV2, appeared to result in favorable outcomes for hospitalized patients in a compassionate use series with shortened time to recovery and a modest decrease in mortality. Currently, remdesivir is available in phase III clinical trials, the compassionate use program, and eventually through the emergency use authorization. A randomized controlled trial of lopinavir/ritonavir demonstrated no apparent clinical or virologic benefit and drug-drug interactions and side effects further limit its utility. Antivirals to treat influenza (oseltamivir) have limited activity against SARS-CoV-2, but favipiravir and umifenovir, influenza antivirals available internationally, have distinct viral targets and require further investigation. Antivirals with evidence of clinical activity must be studied as treatment and prophylaxis for those at high risk for severe COVID-19.

Title: Geneesmiddelen bij COVID-19./ [Medication and comedication in COVID-19 patients] Content: This paper discusses the possible effects of comedication on COVID-19 and the current treatment options for this infection. It is very doubtful that comedication has a disadvantageous effect on the course of the disease. NSAIDs should be avoided in any patient with a possible severe disease, because of potential side effects. Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system should be continued when there is a solid indication, and stopped in case of hemodynamic problems. There is no preference for either ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor inhibitors. Currently, chloroquine and remdesivir are possible treatment options. There is no sound evidence for either treatment. Chloroquine has side effects (nausea, QT prolongation) and there are several drug interactions. The treatment should be reconsidered in the event of side effects and when inferior medication for comorbidity must be prescribed because of possible interactions. Lopinavir/ritonavir is not effective. Supportive care is at present the mainstay of the treatment.

Title: Rapid review for the anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir. Content: The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 rapidly spread across China and worldwide. Remdesivir had been proposed as a promising option for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We provided a rapid review to critically assess the potential anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir on COVID-19 and other coronaviruses based on the most up-to-date evidence. Even though remdesivir was proposed as a promising option for treating COVID-19 based on laboratory experiments and reports from compassionate use, its safety and effect in humans requires high-quality evidence from well-designed and adequately-powered clinical trials for further clarification.

Title: Rapid review for the anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir Content: The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 rapidly spread across China and worldwide. Remdesivir had been proposed as a promising option for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We provided a rapid review to critically assess the potential anti-coronavirus effect of remdesivir on COVID-19 and other coronaviruses based on the most up-to-date evidence. Even though remdesivir was proposed as a promising option for treating COVID-19 based on laboratory experiments and reports from compassionate use, its safety and effect in humans requires high-quality evidence from well-designed and adequately-powered clinical trials for further clarification.

Title: The use of convalescent plasma therapy and remdesivir in the successful management of a critically ill obstetric patient with novel coronavirus 2019 infection: A case report Content: Remdesivir is a novel therapeutic with known activity against SARS CoV-2 and related coronaviruses. Remdesivir, as well as convalescent plasma therapy, are currently under investigation as potential therapies for patients with Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19). In this case report we summarize the use of convalescent plasma therapy and then remdesivir as a late addition in the treatment of a critically ill obstetric patient with COVID-19. The patient subsequently improved, was extubated 5â¯days after initiation of remdesivir, was transitioned to room air 24â¯h later, and discharged at the completion of remdesivir therapy.

Title: The use of convalescent plasma therapy and remdesivir in the successful management of a critically ill obstetric patient with novel coronavirus 2019 infection: A case report Content: Remdesivir is a novel therapeutic with known activity against SARS CoV-2 and related coronaviruses. Remdesivir, as well as convalescent plasma therapy, are currently under investigation as potential therapies for patients with Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19). In this case report we summarize the use of convalescent plasma therapy and then remdesivir as a late addition in the treatment of a critically ill obstetric patient with COVID-19. The patient subsequently improved, was extubated 5 days after initiation of remdesivir, was transitioned to room air 24 h later, and discharged at the completion of remdesivir therapy.

Title: Compassionate remdesivir treatment of severe Covid-19 pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU patients: Clinical outcome and differences in post-treatment hospitalisation status Content: SARS-CoV-2 is causing an increasing number of deaths worldwide because no effective treatment is currently available. Remdesivir has shown in vitro activity against coronaviruses and is a possible antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective (compassionate), open-label study of remdesivir, which was conducted at Luigi Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy, between February 23 and March 20, 2020, involved patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia aged ≥18 years undergoing mechanical ventilation or with an oxygen saturation level of ≤94 % in air or a National Early Warning Score 2 of ≥4. The primary outcome was the change in clinical status based on a 7-category ordinal scale (1 = not hospitalised, resuming normal daily activities; 7 = deceased). The 35 patients enrolled from February 23 to March 20, 2020, included 18 in intensive care unit (ICU), and 17 in our infectious diseases ward (IDW). The 10-day course of remdesivir was completed by 22 patients (63 %) and discontinued by 13, of whom eight (22.8 %) discontinued because of adverse events. The median follow-up was 39 days (IQR 25-44). At day 28, 14 (82.3 %) patients from IDW were discharged, two were still hospitalized and one died (5.9 %), whereas in ICU 6 (33.3 %) were discharged, 8 (44.4 %) patients died, three (16.7 %) were still mechanically ventilated and one (5.6 %) was improved but still hospitalized. Hypertransaminasemia and acute kidney injury were the most frequent severe adverse events observed (42.8 % and 22.8 % of the cases, respectively). Our data suggest that remdesivir can benefit patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia hospitalised outside ICU where clinical outcome was better and adverse events are less frequently observed. Ongoing randomised controlled trials will clarify its real efficacy and safety, who to treat, and when.

Title: Data Monitoring for the Chinese Clinical Trials of Remdesivir in Treating Patients with COVID-19 During the Pandemic Crisis Content: Two phase-III, double-blind, randomized clinical trials of remdesivir plus SOC (standard of care) versus placebo plus SOC have been conducted in Wuhan hospitals by Chinese investigators during the urgent COVID-19 epidemic [ClincalTrials.gov NCT04257656 and NCT04252664]. These trials have been highly anticipated worldwide. We expect investigators of the trials will soon report the clinical and laboratory findings from the medical perspective. This manuscript provides documentary style information on the process of monitoring key data and making recommendations to the sponsor and investigators based on analytical insights when dealing with the emergent situation from the statistical viewpoint. Having monitored data sequentially from 237 patients, we comment on the strength and weakness of the study design and suggest the treatment effect of remdesivir on severe COVID-19 cases. Our experience with using the Dynamic Data Monitoring (DDM) tool has demonstrated its efficiency and reliability in supporting DSMB’s instantaneous review of essential data during the emergent situation. DDM, when used properly by disciplined statisticians, has shown its capability of exploring the trial data flexibly and, in the meantime, protecting the trial’s scientific integrity.

Title: Can Zn Be a Critical Element in COVID-19 Treatment? Content: The current COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 has prompted investigators worldwide to search for an effective anti-viral treatment. A number of anti-viral drugs such as ribavirin, remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, antibiotics such as azithromycin and doxycycline, and anti-parasite such as ivermectin have been recommended for COVID-19 treatment. In addition, sufficient pre-clinical rationale and evidence have been presented to use chloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. Furthermore, Zn has the ability to enhance innate and adaptive immunity in the course of a viral infection. Besides, Zn supplement can favour COVID-19 treatment using those suggested and/or recommended drugs. Again, the effectiveness of Zn can be enhanced by using chloroquine as an ionophore while Zn inside the infected cell can stop SARS-CoV-2 replication. Given those benefits, this perspective paper describes how and why Zn could be given due consideration as a complement to the prescribed treatment of COVID-19.

Title: That Escalated Quickly: Remdesivir's Place in Therapy for COVID-19 Content: Remdesivir is a nucleoside antiviral recently studied in several randomized trials for treatment of COVID-19. The available observational and prospective data are conflicting, requiring clinicians to critically evaluate and reconcile results to determine patient populations that may optimally benefit from remdesivir therapy, especially while drug supply is scarce. In this review, we analyze pertinent clinical remdesivir data for patients with COVID-19 from January 1, 2020, through May 31, 2020.

Title: [Medication and comedication in COVID-19 patients]. Content: This paper discusses the possible effects of comedication on COVID-19 and the current treatment options for this infection. It is very doubtful that comedication has a disadvantageous effect on the course of the disease. NSAIDs should be avoided in any patient with a possible severe disease, because of potential side effects. Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system should be continued when there is a solid indication, and stopped in case of hemodynamic problems. There is no preference for either ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor inhibitors. Currently, chloroquine and remdesivir are possible treatment options. There is no sound evidence for either treatment. Chloroquine has side effects (nausea, QT prolongation) and there are several drug interactions. The treatment should be reconsidered in the event of side effects and when inferior medication for comorbidity must be prescribed because of possible interactions. Lopinavir/ritonavir is not effective. Supportive care is at present the mainstay of the treatment.

Title: Prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir (GS-5734) treatment in the rhesus macaque model of MERS-CoV infection Content: The continued emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) cases with a high case fatality rate stresses the need for the availability of effective antiviral treatments. Remdesivir (GS-5734) effectively inhibited MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) replication in vitro, and showed efficacy against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)-CoV in a mouse model. Here, we tested the efficacy of prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir treatment in a nonhuman primate model of MERS-CoV infection, the rhesus macaque. Prophylactic remdesivir treatment initiated 24 h prior to inoculation completely prevented MERS-CoV-induced clinical disease, strongly inhibited MERS-CoV replication in respiratory tissues, and prevented the formation of lung lesions. Therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated 12 h postinoculation also provided a clear clinical benefit, with a reduction in clinical signs, reduced virus replication in the lungs, and decreased presence and severity of lung lesions. The data presented here support testing of the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in the context of a MERS clinical trial. It may also be considered for a wider range of coronaviruses, including the currently emerging novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV.

Title: Prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir (GS-5734) treatment in the rhesus macaque model of MERS-CoV infection Content: The continued emergence of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) cases with a high case fatality rate stresses the need for the availability of effective antiviral treatments. Remdesivir (GS-5734) effectively inhibited MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) replication in vitro, and showed efficacy against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)-CoV in a mouse model. Here, we tested the efficacy of prophylactic and therapeutic remdesivir treatment in a nonhuman primate model of MERS-CoV infection, the rhesus macaque. Prophylactic remdesivir treatment initiated 24 h prior to inoculation completely prevented MERS-CoV−induced clinical disease, strongly inhibited MERS-CoV replication in respiratory tissues, and prevented the formation of lung lesions. Therapeutic remdesivir treatment initiated 12 h postinoculation also provided a clear clinical benefit, with a reduction in clinical signs, reduced virus replication in the lungs, and decreased presence and severity of lung lesions. The data presented here support testing of the efficacy of remdesivir treatment in the context of a MERS clinical trial. It may also be considered for a wider range of coronaviruses, including the currently emerging novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV.

Title: Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19 Content: BACKGROUND: Remdesivir, a nucleotide analogue prodrug that inhibits viral RNA polymerases, has shown in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We provided remdesivir on a compassionate-use basis to patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the illness caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2. Patients were those with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who had an oxygen saturation of 94% or less while they were breathing ambient air or who were receiving oxygen support. Patients received a 10-day course of remdesivir, consisting of 200 mg administered intravenously on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for the remaining 9 days of treatment. This report is based on data from patients who received remdesivir during the period from January 25, 2020, through March 7, 2020, and have clinical data for at least 1 subsequent day. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients who received at least one dose of remdesivir, data from 8 could not be analyzed (including 7 patients with no post-treatment data and 1 with a dosing error). Of the 53 patients whose data were analyzed, 22 were in the United States, 22 in Europe or Canada, and 9 in Japan. At baseline, 30 patients (57%) were receiving mechanical ventilation and 4 (8%) were receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. During a median follow-up of 18 days, 36 patients (68%) had an improvement in oxygen-support class, including 17 of 30 patients (57%) receiving mechanical ventilation who were extubated. A total of 25 patients (47%) were discharged, and 7 patients (13%) died; mortality was 18% (6 of 34) among patients receiving invasive ventilation and 5% (1 of 19) among those not receiving invasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients hospitalized for severe Covid-19 who were treated with compassionate-use remdesivir, clinical improvement was observed in 36 of 53 patients (68%). Measurement of efficacy will require ongoing randomized, placebo-controlled trials of remdesivir therapy. (Funded by Gilead Sciences.).

Title: How to Quantify and Interpret Treatment Effects in Comparative Clinical Studies of COVID-19 Content: Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) draw intense public attention. More than ever, valid, transparent, and intuitive summaries of the treatment effects, including efficacy and harm, are needed. In recently published and ongoing randomized comparative trials evaluating treatments for COVID-19, time to a positive outcome, such as recovery or improvement, has repeatedly been used as either the primary or key secondary end point. Because patients may die before recovery or improvement, data analysis of this end point faces a competing risk problem. Commonly used survival analysis techniques, such as the Kaplan-Meier method, often are not appropriate for such situations. Moreover, almost all trials have quantified treatment effects by using the hazard ratio, which is difficult to interpret for a positive event, especially in the presence of competing risks. Using 2 recent trials evaluating treatments (remdesivir and convalescent plasma) for COVID-19 as examples, a valid, well-established yet underused procedure is presented for estimating the cumulative recovery or improvement rate curve across the study period. Furthermore, an intuitive and clinically interpretable summary of treatment efficacy based on this curve is also proposed. Clinical investigators are encouraged to consider applying these methods for quantifying treatment effects in future studies of COVID-19.

Title: How to Quantify and Interpret Treatment Effects in Comparative Clinical Studies of COVID-19 Content: Clinical trials of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) draw intense public attention. More than ever, valid, transparent, and intuitive summaries of the treatment effects, including efficacy and harm, are needed. In recently published and ongoing randomized comparative trials evaluating treatments for COVID-19, time to a positive outcome, such as recovery or improvement, has repeatedly been used as either the primary or key secondary end point. Because patients may die before recovery or improvement, data analysis of this end point faces a competing risk problem. Commonly used survival analysis techniques, such as the Kaplan–Meier method, often are not appropriate for such situations. Moreover, almost all trials have quantified treatment effects by using the hazard ratio, which is difficult to interpret for a positive event, especially in the presence of competing risks. Using 2 recent trials evaluating treatments (remdesivir and convalescent plasma) for COVID-19 as examples, a valid, well-established yet underused procedure is presented for estimating the cumulative recovery or improvement rate curve across the study period. Furthermore, an intuitive and clinically interpretable summary of treatment efficacy based on this curve is also proposed. Clinical investigators are encouraged to consider applying these methods for quantifying treatment effects in future studies of COVID-19.

Title: Treatment options for COVID-19: the reality and challenges Content: Abstract An outbreak related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019. An extremely high potential for dissemination resulted in the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020. Despite the worsening trends of COVID-19, no drugs are validated to have significant efficacy in clinical treatment of COVID-19 patients in large-scale studies. Remdesivir is considered the most promising antiviral agent; it works by inhibiting the activity of RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). A large-scale study investigating the clinical efficacy of remdesivir (200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg once daily) is on-going. The other excellent anti-influenza RdRp inhibitor favipiravir is also being clinically evaluated for its efficacy in COVID-19 patients. The protease inhibitor lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) alone is not shown to provide better antiviral efficacy than standard care. However, the regimen of LPV/RTV plus ribavirin was shown to be effective against SARS-CoV in vitro. Another promising alternative is hydroxychloroquine (200 mg thrice daily) plus azithromycin (500 mg on day 1, followed by 250 mg once daily on day 2-5), which showed excellent clinical efficacy on Chinese COVID-19 patients and anti-SARS-CoV-2 potency in vitro. The roles of teicoplanin (which inhibits the viral genome exposure in cytoplasm) and monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 are under investigation. Avoiding the prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, or angiotensin II type I receptor blockers is advised for COVID-19 patients.

Title: Treatment options for COVID-19: The reality and challenges Content: An outbreak related to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in Wuhan, China in December 2019. An extremely high potential for dissemination resulted in the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020. Despite the worsening trends of COVID-19, no drugs are validated to have significant efficacy in clinical treatment of COVID-19 patients in large-scale studies. Remdesivir is considered the most promising antiviral agent; it works by inhibiting the activity of RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). A large-scale study investigating the clinical efficacy of remdesivir (200 mg on day 1, followed by 100 mg once daily) is on-going. The other excellent anti-influenza RdRp inhibitor favipiravir is also being clinically evaluated for its efficacy in COVID-19 patients. The protease inhibitor lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) alone is not shown to provide better antiviral efficacy than standard care. However, the regimen of LPV/RTV plus ribavirin was shown to be effective against SARS-CoV in vitro. Another promising alternative is hydroxychloroquine (200 mg thrice daily) plus azithromycin (500 mg on day 1, followed by 250 mg once daily on day 2-5), which showed excellent clinical efficacy on Chinese COVID-19 patients and anti-SARS-CoV-2 potency in vitro. The roles of teicoplanin (which inhibits the viral genome exposure in cytoplasm) and monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 are under investigation. Avoiding the prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, or angiotensin II type I receptor blockers is advised for COVID-19 patients.

Title: Compassionate remdesivir treatment of severe Covid-19 pneumonia in intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU patients: Clinical outcome and differences in post_treatment hospitalisation status Content: SARS-CoV-2 is causing an increasing number of deaths worldwide because no effective treatment is currently available. Remdesivir has shown in vitro activity against coronaviruses and is a possible antiviral treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection. This prospective (compassionate), open-label study of remdesivir, which was conducted at Luigi Sacco Hospital, Milan, Italy, between February 23 and March 20, 2020, involved patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia aged ≥18 years undergoing mechanical ventilation or with an oxygen saturation level of ≤94% in air or a National Early Warning Score 2 of ≥4. The primary outcome was the change in clinical status based on a 7-category ordinal scale (1 = not hospitalised, resuming normal daily activities; 7 = deceased). The 35 patients enrolled from February 23 to March 20, 2020, included 18 in intensive care unit (ICU), and 17 in our infectious diseases ward (IDW). The 10-day course of remdesivir was completed by 22 patients (63%) and discontinued by 13, of whom eight (22.8%) discontinued because of adverse events. The median follow-up was 39 days (IQR 25-44). At day 28, 14 (82.3%) patients from IDW were discharged, two were still hospitalized and one died (5.9%), whereas in ICU 6 (33.3%) were discharged, 8 (44.4%) patients died, three (16.7%) were still mechanically ventilated and one (5.6%) was improved but still hospitalized. Hypertransaminasemia and acute kidney injury were the most frequent severe adverse events observed (42.8% and 22.8% of the cases, respectively). Our data suggest that remdesivir can benefit patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia hospitalised outside ICU where clinical outcome was better and adverse events are less frequently observed. Ongoing randomised controlled trials will clarify its real efficacy and safety, who to treat, and when.

Title: Statistical Issues and Lessons Learned from COVID-19 Clinical Trials with Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Remdesivir Content: Background: Since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, it has rapidly spread in more than 200 countries or territories with over 8 million confirmed cases and 440,000 deaths by June 17, 2020. Recently, three randomized clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments were completed, one for lopinavir-ritonavir and two for remdesivir. One trial reported that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery, while the other two showed no benefit of the treatment under investigation. However, several statistical issues in the original design and analysis of the three trials are identified, which might shed doubts on their findings and the conclusions should be evaluated with cautions. Objective: From statistical perspectives, we identify several issues in the design and analysis of three COVID-19 trials and reanalyze the data from the cumulative incidence curves in the three trials using more appropriate statistical methods. Methods: The lopinavir-ritonavir trial enrolled 39 additional patients due to insignificant results after the sample size reached the planned number, which led to inflation of the type I error rate. The remdesivir trial of Wang et al. failed to reach the planned sample size due to a lack of eligible patients, while the bootstrap method was used to predict the quantity of clinical interest conditionally and unconditionally if the trial had continued to reach the originally planned sample size. Moreover, we used a terminal (or cure) rate model and a model-free metric known as the restricted mean survival time or the restricted mean time to improvement (RMTI) in this context to analyze the reconstructed data due to the existence of death as competing risk and a terminal event. The remdesivir trial of Beigel et al. reported the median recovery time of the remdesivir and placebo groups and the rate ratio for recovery, while both quantities depend on a particular time point representing local information. We reanalyzed the data to report other percentiles of the time to recovery and adopted the bootstrap method and permutation test to construct the confidence intervals as well as the P values. The restricted mean time to recovery (RMTR) was also computed as a global and robust measure for efficacy. Results: For the lopinavir-ritonavir trial, with the increase of sample size from 160 to 199, the type I error rate was inflated from 0.05 to 0.071. The difference of terminal rates was -8.74% (95% CI [-21.04, 3.55]; P=.16) and the hazards ratio (HR) adjusted for terminal rates was 1.05 (95% CI [0.78, 1.42]; P=.74), indicating no significant difference. The difference of RMTIs between the two groups evaluated at day 28 was -1.67 days (95% CI [-3.62, 0.28]; P=.09) in favor of lopinavir-ritonavir but not statistically significant. For the remdesivir trial of Wang et al., the difference of terminal rates was -0.89% (95% CI [-2.84, 1.06]; P=.19) and the HR adjusted for terminal rates was 0.92 (95% CI [0.63, 1.35]; P=.67). The difference of RMTIs at day 28 was -0.89 day (95% CI [-2.84, 1.06]; P=.37). The planned sample size was 453, yet only 236 patients were enrolled. The conditional prediction shows that the HR estimates would reach statistical significance if the target sample size had been maintained, and both conditional and unconditional prediction delivered significant HR results if the trial had continued to double the target sample size. For the remdesivir trial of Beigel et al., the difference of RMTRs between the remdesivir and placebo groups up to day 30 was -2.7 days (95% CI [-4.0, -1.2]; P<.001), confirming the superiority of remdesivir. The difference in recovery time at the 25th percentile (95% CI [-3, 0]; P=.65) was insignificant, while the differences manifested to be statistically significant at larger percentiles. Conclusions: Based on the statistical issues and lessons learned from the recent three clinical trials on COVID-19 treatments, we suggest more appropriate approaches for the design and analysis for ongoing and future COVID-19 trials.

Title: Remdesivir (GS-5734) Impedes Enterovirus Replication Through Viral RNA Synthesis Inhibition Content: Human enteroviruses are responsible for diverse diseases, from mild respiratory symptoms to fatal neurological complications. Currently, no registered antivirals have been approved for clinical therapy. Thus, a therapeutic agent for the enterovirus-related disease is urgently needed. Remdesivir (GS-5734) is a novel monophosphoramidate adenosine analog prodrug that exhibits potent antiviral activity against diverse RNA virus families, including positive-sense Coronaviridae and Flaviviridae and negative-sense Filoviridae, Paramyxoviridae, and Pneumoviridae. Currently, remdesivir is under phase 3 clinical development for disease COVID-19 treatment. Here, we found that remdesivir impeded both EV71 viral RNA (vRNA) and complementary (cRNA) synthesis, indicating that EV71 replication is inhibited by the triphosphate (TP) form of remdesivir. Moreover, remdesivir showed potent antiviral activity against diverse enteroviruses. These data extend the remdesivir antiviral activity to enteroviruses and indicate that remdesivir is a promising antiviral treatment for EV71 and other enterovirus infections.

Title: Pharmacotherapy in COVID-19; A narrative review for emergency providers Content: INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has been particularly challenging due to a lack of established therapies and treatment guidelines. With the rapid transmission of disease, even the off-label use of available therapies has been impeded by limited availability. Several antivirals, antimalarials, and biologics are being considered for treatment at this time. The purpose of this literature review is to synthesize the available information regarding treatment options for COVID-19 and serve as a resource for health care professionals. OBJECTIVES: This narrative review was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of current therapy options for COVID-19 and address the controversial use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). PubMed and SCOPUS were queried using a combination of the keywords "COVID 19," "SARS-CoV-2," and "treatment." All types of studies were evaluated including systematic reviews, case-studies, and clinical guidelines. DISCUSSION: There are currently no therapeutic drugs available that are directly active against SARS-CoV-2; however, several antivirals (remdesivir, favipiravir) and antimalarials (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine) have emerged as potential therapies. Current guidelines recommend combination treatment with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin or chloroquine, if hydroxychloroquine is unavailable, in patients with moderate disease, although these recommendations are based on limited evidence. Remdesivir and convalescent plasma may be considered in critical patients with respiratory failure; however, access to these therapies may be limited. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may be used in patients who develop evidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Corticosteroids should be avoided unless there is evidence of refractory septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or another compelling indication for their use. ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be discontinued at this time and ibuprofen may be used for fever. CONCLUSION: There are several ongoing clinical trials that are testing the efficacy of single and combination treatments with the drugs mentioned in this review and new agents are under development. Until the results of these trials become available, we must use the best available evidence for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, we can learn from the experiences of healthcare providers around the world to combat this pandemic.

Title: Pharmacotherapy in COVID-19; A narrative review for emergency providers Content: INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has been particularly challenging due to a lack of established therapies and treatment guidelines. With the rapid transmission of disease, even the off-label use of available therapies has been impeded by limited availability. Several antivirals, antimalarials, and biologics are being considered for treatment at this time. The purpose of this literature review is to synthesize the available information regarding treatment options for COVID-19 and serve as a resource for health care professionals. OBJECTIVES: This narrative review was conducted to summarize the effectiveness of current therapy options for COVID-19 and address the controversial use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). PubMed and SCOPUS were queried using a combination of the keywords “COVID 19,” “SARS-CoV-2,” and “treatment.” All types of studies were evaluated including systematic reviews, case-studies, and clinical guidelines. DISCUSSION: There are currently no therapeutic drugs available that are directly active against SARS-CoV-2; however, several antivirals (remdesivir, favipiravir) and antimalarials (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine) have emerged as potential therapies. Current guidelines recommend combination treatment with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin or chloroquine, if hydroxychloroquine is unavailable, in patients with moderate disease, although these recommendations are based on limited evidence. Remdesivir and convalescent plasma may be considered in critical patients with respiratory failure; however, access to these therapies may be limited. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may be used in patients who develop evidence of cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Glucocorticoids should be avoided unless there is evidence of refractory septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or another compelling indication for their use. ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be discontinued at this time and ibuprofen may be used for fever. CONCLUSION: There are several ongoing clinical trials that are testing the efficacy of single and combination treatments with the drugs mentioned in this review and new agents are under development. Until the results of these trials become available, we must use the best available evidence for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Additionally, we can learn from the experiences of healthcare providers around the world to combat this pandemic.

Title: Antiviral treatment of COVID-19 Content: Currently, there is not any specific effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19. Although most of the COVID-19 patients have mild or moderate courses, up to 5%10% can have severe, potentially life threatening course, there is an urgent need for effective drugs. Optimized supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy. There have been more than 300 clinical trials going on, various antiviral and immunomodulating agents are in various stages of evaluation for COVID-19 in those trials and some of them will be published in the next couple of months. Despite the urgent need to find an effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19 through randomized controlled studies, certain agents are being used all over the world based on either in-vitro or extrapolated evidence or observational studies. The most frequently used agents both in Turkey and all over the world including chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir and remdesivir will be reviewed here .Nitazoxanide and ivermectin were also included in this review as they have recently been reported to have an activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and are licensed for the treatment of some other human infections.

Title: Antiviral treatment of COVID-19 Content: Currently, there is not any specific effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19. Although most of the COVID-19 patients have mild or moderate courses, up to 5%–10% can have severe, potentially life threatening course, there is an urgent need for effective drugs. Optimized supportive care remains the mainstay of therapy. There have been more than 300 clinical trials going on, various antiviral and immunomodulating agents are in various stages of evaluation for COVID-19 in those trials and some of them will be published in the next couple of months. Despite the urgent need to find an effective antiviral treatment for COVID-19 through randomized controlled studies, certain agents are being used all over the world based on either in-vitro or extrapolated evidence or observational studies. The most frequently used agents both in Turkey and all over the world including chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, favipiravir and remdesivir will be reviewed here .Nitazoxanide and ivermectin were also included in this review as they have recently been reported to have an activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and are licensed for the treatment of some other human infections.

Title: Harmonizing heterogeneous endpoints in COVID-19 trials without loss of information - an essential step to facilitate decision making Content: Background: Many trials are now underway to inform decision-makers on potential effects of treatments for COVID-19. To provide sufficient information for all involved decision-makers (clinicians, public health authorities, drug regulatory agencies) a multiplicity of endpoints must be considered. It is a challenge to generate detailed high quality evidence from data while ensuring fast availability and evaluation of the results. Methods: We reviewed all interventional COVID-19 trials on Remdesivir, Lopinavir/ritonavir and Hydroxychloroquine registered in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and summarized the endpoints used to assess treatment effects. We propose a multistate model that harmonizes heterogeneous endpoints and differing lengths of follow-up within and between trials. Results: There are currently, March 27, 2020, 23 registered interventional trials investigating the potential benefits of Remdesivir, Lopinavir/ritonavir and Hydroxychloroquine. The endpoints are highly heterogeneous. Follow-up for the primary endpoints ranges from four to 168 days. A detailed precisely defined endpoint has been proposed by the global network REMAP-CAP, which is specialized on community-acquired pneumonia. Their seven-category endpoint accounts for major clinical events informative for all decision-makers. Moreover, the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative is currently working on a core outcome set. We propose a multistate model that accommodates analysis of these recommended endpoints. The model allows for a detailed investigation of treatment effects for various endpoints over the course of time thereby harmonizing differing endpoints and lengths of follow-up. Conclusion: Multistate model analysis is a powerful tool to study clinically heterogeneous endpoints (mortality, discharge) as well as endpoints influencing hospital capacities (duration of hospitalization and ventilation) simultaneously over time. Our proposed model extracts all information available in the data and is - by harmonizing endpoints within and between trials - a step towards faster decision making. All ongoing clinical trials, especially those with severe cases, should accommodate primary analysis with a stacked probability plot of the major events mechanical ventilation, discharge alive and death.

Title: Pharmacological Therapeutics Targeting RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase, Proteinase and Spike Protein: From Mechanistic Studies to Clinical Trials for COVID-19 Content: An outbreak of novel coronavirus-related pneumonia COVID-19, that was identified in December 2019, has expanded rapidly, with cases now confirmed in more than 211 countries or areas. This constant transmission of a novel coronavirus and its ability to spread from human to human have prompted scientists to develop new approaches for treatment of COVID-19. A recent study has shown that remdesivir and chloroquine effectively inhibit the replication and infection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2, 2019-nCov) in vitro. In the United States, one case of COVID-19 was successfully treated with compassionate use of remdesivir in January of 2020. In addition, a clinically proven protease inhibitor, camostat mesylate, has been demonstrated to inhibit Calu-3 infection with SARS-CoV-2 and prevent SARS-2-spike protein (S protein)-mediated entry into primary human lung cells. Here, we systemically discuss the pharmacological therapeutics targeting RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), proteinase and S protein for treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This review should shed light on the fundamental rationale behind inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 enzymes RdRp as new therapeutic approaches for management of patients with COVID-19. In addition, we will discuss the viability and challenges in targeting RdRp and proteinase, and application of natural product quinoline and its analog chloroquine for treatment of coronavirus infection. Finally, determining the structural-functional relationships of the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 will provide new insights into inhibition of interactions between S protein and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and enable us to develop novel therapeutic approaches for novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.

Title: Remdesivir inhibits renal fibrosis in obstructed kidneys Content: Aim Kidney impairment is observed in patients with COVID-19. We aimed to demonstrate the effect of anti-COVID-19 agent remdesivir on renal fibrosis. Methods Remdesivir and its active nucleoside metabolite GS-441524 were used to treat TGF-β stimulated renal fibroblasts (NRK-49F) and human renal epithelial cells (HK2). Cell viability was determined by CCK8 assay, and fibrotic markers were measured by Western blotting. Vehicle or remdesivir were given by intraperitoneal injection or renal injection through the left ureter in unilateral ureteral obstruction (UUO) mice. Serum and kidneys were harvested. The concentrations of remdesivir and GS-441524 were measured using LC-MS/MS. Renal and liver function were assessed. Renal fibrosis was evaluated by Masson’s trichrome staining and Western blotting. Results Remdesivir and GS-441524 inhibited cell proliferation and the expression of fibrotic markers (fibronectin, pSmad3, and aSMA) in NRK-49F and HK2 cells. Intraperitoneal injection or renal injection of remdesivir attenuated renal fibrosis of UUO kidneys. Renal and liver function were not changed in remdesivir treated UUO mice. Remdesivir can not be detected, but two remdesivir metabolites were detected after injection. Conclusion Remdesivir inhibits renal fibrosis in obstructed kidneys.

Title: Treatment Considerations for COVID-19: A Critical Review of the Evidence (or Lack Thereof) Content: Abstract The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is causing a worldwide pandemic that may lead to a highly morbid and potentially fatal coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). There is currently no drug that has been proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19. Several candidate drugs are being considered and evaluated for treatment. This includes clinically-available drugs, such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir, which are being repurposed for the treatment of COVID-19. Novel experimental therapies, such as remdesivir and favipiravir, are also actively being investigated for antiviral efficacy. Clinically-available and investigational immunomodulators, such as the IL-6 inhibitors tocilizumab and sarilumab and the anti-GMCSF lenzilumab, are being tested for their anticipated effect in counteracting the pro-inflammatory cytokine environment that characterizes severe and critical COVID-19. This review article examines the evidence behind the potential use of these leading drug candidates for the treatment of COVID-19. The authors conclude, based on this review, that there is still no high-quality evidence to support any of these proposed drug therapies. The authors, therefore, encourage the enrollment of eligible patients to multiple ongoing clinical trials that assess the efficacy and safety of these candidate therapies. Until the results of controlled trials are available, none of the suggested therapeutics is clinically proven as an effective therapy for COVID-19.

Title: Simeprevir suppresses SARS-CoV-2 replication and synergizes with remdesivir Content: The recent outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, is a global threat to human health. By in vitro screening and biochemical characterization, we identified the hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitor simeprevir as an especially promising repurposable drug for treating COVID-19. We also revealed that simeprevir synergizes with the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP) inhibitor remdesivir to suppress the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Our results provide preclinical rationale for the combination treatment of simeprevir and remdesivir for the pharmacological management of COVID-19 patients. One Sentence Summary Discovery of simeprevir as a potent suppressor of SARS-CoV-2 viral replication that synergizes remdesivir.

Title: Old and re-purposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19 Content: INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has developed since December 2019. It has caused a global pandemic with more than three hundred thousand case fatalities. However, apart from supportive care by respirators, no standard medical therapy is validated. AREAS COVERED: This paper presents old drugs with potential in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2. The in vitro database, adverse effects, and potential toxicities of these drugs are reviewed regarding their feasibility of clinical prescription for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. To obtain convincing recommendations, we referred to opinions from the US National Institute of Health regarding drugs repurposed for COVID-19 therapy. EXPERT OPINION: Although strong evidence of well-designed randomized controlled studies regarding COVID-19 therapy is presently lacking, remdesivir, teicoplanin, hydroxychloroquine (not in combination with azithromycin), and ivermectin might be effective antiviral drugs and are deemed promising candidates for controlling SARS-CoV-2. In addition, tocilizumab might be considered as the supplementary treatment for COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome. In future, clinical trials regarding a combination of potentially effective drugs against SARS-CoV-2 need to be conducted to establish the optimal regimen for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.

Title: Old and re-purposed drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. Content: Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has developed since December 2019. It has caused a global pandemic with more than three hundred thousand case fatalities. However, apart from supportive care by respirators, no standard medical therapy is validated.Areas covered: This paper presents old drugs with potential in vitro efficacy against SARS-CoV-2. The in vitro database, adverse effects, and potential toxicities of these drugs are reviewed regarding their feasibility of clinical prescription for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. To obtain convincing recommendations, we referred to opinions from the US National Institute of Health regarding drugs repurposed for COVID-19 therapy.Expert opinion: Although strong evidence of well-designed randomized controlled studies regarding COVID-19 therapy is presently lacking, remdesivir, teicoplanin, hydroxychloroquine (not in combination with azithromycin), and ivermectin might be effective antiviral drugs and are deemed promising candidates for controlling SARS-CoV-2. In addition, tocilizumab might be considered as the supplementary treatment for COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome. In future, clinical trials regarding a combination of potentially effective drugs against SARS-CoV-2 need to be conducted to establish the optimal regimen for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19.

Title: Pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and GS-441524 in two critically ill patients who recovered from COVID-19 Content: BACKGROUND: Remdesivir is a prodrug of the nucleoside analogue GS-441524 and is under evaluation for treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and GS-441524 in plasma, bronchoalveolar aspirate (BAS) and CSF in two critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Remdesivir was administered at 200 mg loading dose on the first day followed by 12 days of 100 mg in two critically ill patients. Blood samples were collected immediately after (C0) and at 1 (C1) and 24 h (C24) after intravenous administration on day 3 until day 9. BAS samples were collected on Days 4, 7 and 9 from both patients while one CSF on Day 7 was obtained in one patient. Remdesivir and GS-441524 concentrations were measured in these samples using a validated UHPLC-MS/MS method. RESULTS: We observed higher concentrations of remdesivir at C0 (6- to 7-fold higher than EC50 from in vitro studies) and a notable decay at C1. GS-441524 plasma concentrations reached a peak at C1 and persisted until the next administration. Higher concentrations of GS-441524 were observed in the patient with mild renal dysfunction. Mean BAS/plasma concentration ratios of GS-441524 were 2.3% and 6.4% in Patient 1 and Patient 2, respectively. The CSF concentration found in Patient 2 was 25.7% with respect to plasma. GS-441524 levels in lung and CNS suggest compartmental differences in drug exposure. CONCLUSIONS: We report the first pharmacokinetic evaluation of remdesivir and GS-441524 in recovered COVID-19 patients. Further study of the pharmacokinetic profile of remdesivir, GS-441524 and the intracellular triphosphate form are required.

Title: Anti COVID-19 Drugs: Need for More Clinical Evidence and Global Action Content: The World Health Organization (WHO) called the outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern” (PHEIC). According to the WHO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), currently there are no medicines or vaccines that have been claimed to be useful in the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Several existing antiviral drugs, previously developed or used as treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and malaria, are being investigated as COVID-19 treatments and some of them are being used in clinical trials. According to the CDC and Chinese treatment guidelines for COVID-19, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and one of the investigational agents (remdesivir) are recommended in critically ill older patients. The use of other potential drugs reported in different studies may be considered if treatment with first-line drugs is ineffective. There are currently no complete data available from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all of the trial drugs for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Until now, it is still unclear which drug can successfully fight against the disease. Therefore, for the better safety of patients with COVID-19, further clinical trials and large randomized controlled studies are needed to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all the potential drugs. Such a measure requires action at the global level.

Title: Anti COVID-19 Drugs: Need for More Clinical Evidence and Global Action Content: The World Health Organization (WHO) called the outbreak of coronavirus infectious disease-2019 (COVID-19) a "Public Health Emergency of International Concern" (PHEIC). According to the WHO, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), currently there are no medicines or vaccines that have been claimed to be useful in the prevention or treatment of COVID-19. Several existing antiviral drugs, previously developed or used as treatments for severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and malaria, are being investigated as COVID-19 treatments and some of them are being used in clinical trials. According to the CDC and Chinese treatment guidelines for COVID-19, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, and one of the investigational agents (remdesivir) are recommended in critically ill older patients. The use of other potential drugs reported in different studies may be considered if treatment with first-line drugs is ineffective. There are currently no complete data available from large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to provide clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all of the trial drugs for prophylaxis or treatment of COVID-19. Until now, it is still unclear which drug can successfully fight against the disease. Therefore, for the better safety of patients with COVID-19, further clinical trials and large randomized controlled studies are needed to validate the effective role, safety profile, and adverse effects of all the potential drugs. Such a measure requires action at the global level.

Title: SARS-CoV-2: Recent Reports on Antiviral Therapies Based on Lopinavir/Ritonavir, Darunavir/Umifenovir, Hydroxychloroquine, Remdesivir, Favipiravir and Other Drugs for the Treatment of the New Coronavirus Content: Here we report on the most recent updates on experimental drugs successfully em- ployed in the treatment of the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, also referred to as COVID-19 (COronaVIrus Disease 19). In particular, several cases of recovered patients have been reported after being treated with lopinavir/ritonavir (which is widely used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection) in combination with the anti-flu drug oseltamivir. In addition, remdesivir, which has been previously administered to Ebola virus patients, has also proven effective in the U.S. against coronavirus, while antimalarial chloroquine and hydroxy- chloroquine, favipiravir and co-administered darunavir and umifenovir (in patient therapies) were also recently recorded as having anti-SARS-CoV-2 effects. Since the recoveries/deaths ratio in the last weeks significantly increased, especially in China, it is clear that the experi- mental antiviral therapy, together with the availability of intensive care unit beds in hospitals and rigorous government control measures, all play an important role in dealing with this vi- rus. This also stresses the urgent need for the scientific community to devote its efforts to the development of other more specific antiviral strategies.