AMS-PHPT Research Collaboration, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand; Department of Statistics, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
AMS-PHPT Research Collaboration, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Int J Infect Dis. 2024 Jun;143:107021. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107021. Epub 2024 Mar 30.
Evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir and favipiravir in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19 and at risk of severe COVID-19.
In an open-label, parallel-group, multicenter trial in Thailand, participants with moderate COVID-19 and at least one factor associated with severe COVID-19 were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral molnupiravir or oral favipiravir (standard of care). Phone calls for remote symptom assessment were made on Days 6, 15, and 29. Participants with worsening symptoms were instructed to return to the hospital. The primary endpoint was pulmonary involvement by Day 29, as evidenced by ≥2 of the following: dyspnea, oxygen saturation <92% or imaging.
Nine hundred seventy-seven participants (487 molnupiravir, 490 favipiravir) were enrolled from 8 July 2022 to 19 January 2023. 98% had received ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 83% ≥3 doses. By Day 29, pulmonary involvement occurred in 0% (0/483) in molnupiravir arm versus 1% (5/482) in favipiravir arm (-1.0%; Newcombe 95.2% CI: -2.4% to -0.0%; P = 0.021); all-cause death in 0% (0/483) and <1% (1/482); COVID-19 related hospitalization in <1% (1/483) and 1% (3/482); treatment-related adverse event in 1% (5/483) and 1% (4/486); and serious adverse event in 1% (4/483) and 1% (4/486).
Favipiravir and molnupiravir had a similar efficacy and safety profile. Whether either of the two reduced the risk of complications during the omicron era in this population with a low risk of pulmonary involvement and a high vaccine coverage remains unclear. There were no differences in any of the safety endpoints.
TCTR20230111009.
评估和比较莫努匹韦和法维拉韦在门诊轻度至中度 COVID-19 患者和有 COVID-19 重症风险患者中的疗效和安全性。
在泰国进行的一项开放标签、平行分组、多中心试验中,将中度 COVID-19 且至少有 1 个与 COVID-19 重症相关因素的患者随机分配 1:1 接受口服莫努匹韦或口服法维拉韦(标准治疗)。在第 6、15 和 29 天进行电话远程症状评估。出现症状恶化的患者被指示返回医院。主要终点为第 29 天时肺部受累情况,表现为以下至少 2 项:呼吸困难、血氧饱和度<92%或影像学异常。
2022 年 7 月 8 日至 2023 年 1 月 19 日期间,共招募了 977 名参与者(莫努匹韦组 487 名,法维拉韦组 490 名)。98%的患者接受了≥1 剂 COVID-19 疫苗,83%的患者接受了≥3 剂。第 29 天,莫努匹韦组中肺部受累的发生率为 0%(0/483),而法维拉韦组为 1%(5/482)(-1.0%;Newcombe 95.2%CI:-2.4%至-0.0%;P=0.021);全因死亡率为 0%(0/483)和<1%(1/482);COVID-19 相关住院率为<1%(1/483)和 1%(3/482);治疗相关不良事件发生率为 1%(5/483)和 1%(4/486);严重不良事件发生率为 1%(4/483)和 1%(4/486)。
法维拉韦和莫努匹韦的疗效和安全性相似。在这一肺部受累风险低且疫苗接种率高的人群中,这两种药物是否都能降低奥密克戎时期的并发症风险尚不清楚。在任何安全性终点上都没有差异。
TCTR20230111009。