Cargando…

280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination

BACKGROUND: To cope with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatments were studied and out of these, monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have shown efficacy to prevent the development of pneumonia after the infection METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study including patients with SARS-CoV...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro, Braccialarghe, Neva, Zaçe, Drieda, Spalliera, Ilaria, Coppola, Luigi, Campogiani, Laura, Piermatteo, Lorenzo, Bellocchi, Maria Concetta, Silberstein, Francesca Ceccherini, Marco, Iannetta, Sarmati, Loredana, Andreoni, Massimo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9751637/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.358
_version_ 1784850520646615040
author Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro
Braccialarghe, Neva
Zaçe, Drieda
Spalliera, Ilaria
Coppola, Luigi
Campogiani, Laura
Piermatteo, Lorenzo
Bellocchi, Maria Concetta
Silberstein, Francesca Ceccherini
Marco, Iannetta
Sarmati, Loredana
Andreoni, Massimo
author_facet Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro
Braccialarghe, Neva
Zaçe, Drieda
Spalliera, Ilaria
Coppola, Luigi
Campogiani, Laura
Piermatteo, Lorenzo
Bellocchi, Maria Concetta
Silberstein, Francesca Ceccherini
Marco, Iannetta
Sarmati, Loredana
Andreoni, Massimo
author_sort Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To cope with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatments were studied and out of these, monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have shown efficacy to prevent the development of pneumonia after the infection METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study including patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, treated with MAbs (bamlanivimab/etesevimab (B/E), casirivimab/imdevimab (C/I) or sotrovimab (S)) from March 2021 to February 2022 RESULTS: We included 504 patients with a median age of 62 years (IQR 49-72), 51% were males and 66% had completed the vaccination schedule according to the current Italian regulations. The most frequent eligibility criteria are summarized in figure 1. As for MAbs combination, patients were treated with B/E (54%), followed by C/I (30%) and S (16%). Outcomes are shown in Table 1. Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) negativization time had a positive correlation with patients’ age (r=0.16; p=0.001), C-reactive protein (CRP) (r=0.26; p< 0.001) and creatinine values (r=0.22; p< 0.001) assessed at baseline (infusion day). Time to NPS negativization was 6.9 (95% C.I. [4.5-9.2]) days shorter for vaccinated compared to unvaccinated patients (p< 0.001). Patients treated with C/I had a negative NPS on average 4.5 (95% C.I.= [1.8-7.3] days earlier than patients treated with B/E; patients who received S reached negativization 6.0 (95% C.I.= [2.2, 9.9]) days earlier than those treated with B/E (p=0.004). Patients with positive outcome had a negative NPS on average 14.3 (95% C.I.= [6.8, 23.1)], 25.5 (95% C.I.= [18.9, 33.4] and 68.3 (95% C.I.= [47.7, 90.2]) days earlier than patients who needed hospitalization and patients who died (p< 0.001, p< 0.001, respectively). Unvaccinated patients had a higher rate of oxygen support need compared to vaccinated ones (p=0.006). Patients with worse outcomes were significantly older and had higher values of CRP and creatinine at baseline (p=0.04, p< 0.001, p< 0.001, respectively) Percentage of eligibility criteria of our patients [Figure: see text] The majority of patients had more than one criterion Clinical outcome of our patients [Figure: see text] Nasopharyngeal swab was repeated weekly, until negative CONCLUSION: MAbs reduce the risk of hospitalization in fragile patients. Vaccinated patients had shorter time of NPS negativization and lower probability of hospitalization. Older age, higher CRP and creatinine values assessed at baseline, correlated with worse outcomes. S was the most effective treatment amongst MAbs used in our study DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9751637
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97516372022-12-16 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro Braccialarghe, Neva Zaçe, Drieda Spalliera, Ilaria Coppola, Luigi Campogiani, Laura Piermatteo, Lorenzo Bellocchi, Maria Concetta Silberstein, Francesca Ceccherini Marco, Iannetta Sarmati, Loredana Andreoni, Massimo Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: To cope with the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several treatments were studied and out of these, monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have shown efficacy to prevent the development of pneumonia after the infection METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study including patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, treated with MAbs (bamlanivimab/etesevimab (B/E), casirivimab/imdevimab (C/I) or sotrovimab (S)) from March 2021 to February 2022 RESULTS: We included 504 patients with a median age of 62 years (IQR 49-72), 51% were males and 66% had completed the vaccination schedule according to the current Italian regulations. The most frequent eligibility criteria are summarized in figure 1. As for MAbs combination, patients were treated with B/E (54%), followed by C/I (30%) and S (16%). Outcomes are shown in Table 1. Nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) negativization time had a positive correlation with patients’ age (r=0.16; p=0.001), C-reactive protein (CRP) (r=0.26; p< 0.001) and creatinine values (r=0.22; p< 0.001) assessed at baseline (infusion day). Time to NPS negativization was 6.9 (95% C.I. [4.5-9.2]) days shorter for vaccinated compared to unvaccinated patients (p< 0.001). Patients treated with C/I had a negative NPS on average 4.5 (95% C.I.= [1.8-7.3] days earlier than patients treated with B/E; patients who received S reached negativization 6.0 (95% C.I.= [2.2, 9.9]) days earlier than those treated with B/E (p=0.004). Patients with positive outcome had a negative NPS on average 14.3 (95% C.I.= [6.8, 23.1)], 25.5 (95% C.I.= [18.9, 33.4] and 68.3 (95% C.I.= [47.7, 90.2]) days earlier than patients who needed hospitalization and patients who died (p< 0.001, p< 0.001, respectively). Unvaccinated patients had a higher rate of oxygen support need compared to vaccinated ones (p=0.006). Patients with worse outcomes were significantly older and had higher values of CRP and creatinine at baseline (p=0.04, p< 0.001, p< 0.001, respectively) Percentage of eligibility criteria of our patients [Figure: see text] The majority of patients had more than one criterion Clinical outcome of our patients [Figure: see text] Nasopharyngeal swab was repeated weekly, until negative CONCLUSION: MAbs reduce the risk of hospitalization in fragile patients. Vaccinated patients had shorter time of NPS negativization and lower probability of hospitalization. Older age, higher CRP and creatinine values assessed at baseline, correlated with worse outcomes. S was the most effective treatment amongst MAbs used in our study DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9751637/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.358 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abstracts
Cavasio, Rosario Alessandro
Braccialarghe, Neva
Zaçe, Drieda
Spalliera, Ilaria
Coppola, Luigi
Campogiani, Laura
Piermatteo, Lorenzo
Bellocchi, Maria Concetta
Silberstein, Francesca Ceccherini
Marco, Iannetta
Sarmati, Loredana
Andreoni, Massimo
280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title_full 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title_fullStr 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title_full_unstemmed 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title_short 280. Monoclonal Antibodies Against SARS-CoV-2 in Fragile Outpatients: Clinical and Laboratory Risk Factors and Protective Role of Vaccination
title_sort 280. monoclonal antibodies against sars-cov-2 in fragile outpatients: clinical and laboratory risk factors and protective role of vaccination
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9751637/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac492.358
work_keys_str_mv AT cavasiorosarioalessandro 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT braccialargheneva 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT zacedrieda 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT spallierailaria 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT coppolaluigi 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT campogianilaura 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT piermatteolorenzo 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT bellocchimariaconcetta 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT silbersteinfrancescaceccherini 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT marcoiannetta 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT sarmatiloredana 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination
AT andreonimassimo 280monoclonalantibodiesagainstsarscov2infragileoutpatientsclinicalandlaboratoryriskfactorsandprotectiveroleofvaccination