17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Remdesivir in COVID-19 management: availability and relevance to low- and middle-income countries

      letter

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) comprises a spectrum of pathologies, including serious respiratory illness such as pneumonia and lung failure, and is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) [1]. Treatment guidelines and protocols for the management of COVID-19 have been prepared globally by various healthcare organizations and regulatory agencies; however, to date, no specific treatment option has been proven to cure COVID-19. On 1 May 2020, the US FDA granted an Emergency Use Authorization for remdesivir [2], a nucleotide analog prodrug that inhibits viral RNA polymerase. Having previously undergone research in the treatment of Ebola, the focus has recently been on the use of remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19 [3]. With COVID-19 cases in Nepal rising to 70,614 as of 25 September 2020, with the death of 459 patients [4], Nepal is seeing a steep rise in cases. A major share of the population is of low socioeconomic status, and with no production of remdesivir within Nepal, the relevance and significance of the use of this drug to treat COVID-19 in that country, as well as in other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), is questionable. Clinical evidence In common with most antiviral drugs, remdesivir is more efficacious when administered early in the course of the disease than when administered in the later critical stage [5]. With its broad spectrum of activity, remdesivir inhibits RNA-dependent RNA polymerases and causes arrest in RNA synthesis, most probably by delaying RNA chain termination [6]. Several clinical trials have been conducted to determine the efficacy of remdesivir in COVID-19 patients. Studies have suggested a shortened course of treatment, a reduction in viral load, and clinical efficacy when the drug is administered early in the course of the disease. The significant clinical improvement in respiratory status (68% of 61 patients) and shortening of the disease course was reported in the study by Grein et al. [7]. These results are supported by those of a larger study (n = 1026) by Beigel et al., with the median recovery time being shortened from 15 days with placebo to 10 days with remdesivir, but with no significant reduction in mortality rate [8]. The study conducted by Goldman et al. (n = 397) showed clinical improvement of ≥2 points on a 7-point ordinal scale in 64% and 54% of patients receiving a 5- or 10-day regimen of remdesivir, respectively, with those receiving 10 days of treatment being at a clinically worse status at the beginning of the trial [9]. Remdesivir significantly reduced viral load in a study conducted in China, but the study was terminated early as COVID-19 became controlled during the early stages of the trial and no new patients were available for randomization [10]. Overall, the efficacy of remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19 is currently questionable as the main purpose of a therapeutic agent during the COVID-19 pandemic is to reduce mortality, not to decrease the length of hospital stay [11]. The adverse effects associated with remdesivir include hypoalbuminemia, constipation, anemia, hypokalemia, increased bilirubin, thrombocytopenia, and acute respiratory failure [9, 10]. The study by Beigel et al. suggested that adverse effects did not differ significantly between placebo and remdesivir [8]. Forty-four clinical trials of remdesivir for COVID-19 are currently registered [12]. Studies with larger populations, and which also compare the efficacy of remdesivir with that of other antiviral drugs, are needed to confirm the relevance of remdesivir in treating COVID-19. Cost and availability Gilead Sciences stated that by April 2020 they would have produced enough remdesivir for 140,000 courses of treatment, and that most of this will be supplied to the US market [13]. Beximco Pharmaceuticals Limited in Bangladesh is the first South-Asian company to start the production of a generic version of remdesivir. Gilead’s recent agreements with India’s Cipla and Jubilant Life Sciences, as well as with Pakistan’s Ferozsons Laboratories, will increase the production of remdesivir in this region. Substantial amounts of the drug need to be distributed. Given that Pakistan had 309,581 cases and India had 5,908,748 cases of COVID-19 as at 25 September 2020, the supply of remdesivir to Nepal and other LMICs will certainly be limited. In the USA, the official cost of remdesivir is US$520 per vial for those with private insurance and US$390 per vial for those without insurance [14]. The required dose of remdesivir is two vials on the first day and one vial per day for the remaining course of the treatment. This brings the cost to US$2340–3120 for a 5-day course and US$4290–5720 for a 10-day course. Cipla International has distributed the drug at a price of US$53.34 per vial in India, although a higher price of up to US$818 per vial has been reported due to insufficient production and black marketing [15, 16]. Heavily criticized for its initial cost of US$84,000 for one course of sofosbuvir [17], the pricing policy of Gilead has been considered predatory by some. At current costs, the financial burden of a course of remdesivir might be unbearable for many patients. With the economy falling apart, the next logical question is will Nepal, as well as other LMICs, be able bear the costs of such medications, even if the availability of these medications can be established? Use in low- and middle-income countries Remdesivir appears to be more potent when administered early in the course of disease [5]. This makes it difficult to select which patients are to be administered the drug, considering the uncertainty of progression of the disease and significant demographic variation. As a result, a large proportion of patients would require the drug, which is difficult to acquire and very expensive in LMICs such as Nepal. Thus, the use of remdesivir is relatively insignificant for routine treatment regimens to treat COVID-19 in LIMICs. Conclusion Currently, no therapies have established efficacy and safety for the management of COVID-19. Given the experimental phase of the management of the disease, the use of remdesivir has shown some positive results, and its compassionate use during the early stages of the disease is justified. Remdesivir may be a promising medication for COVID-19 but the results of well-designed clinical trials are necessary to clarify its effectiveness, tolerability, and safety. However, for LMICs such as Nepal, the use of remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19 is currently insignificant due to its unavailability and the high acquisition cost of the drug, as well as the lack of evidence regarding its effects in reducing mortality. To make this drug relevant to COVID-19 management in LMICs, production should be commenced at the national level, followed by government implementation of price reduction strategies after its mass production.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report

          Abstract 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.)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Remdesivir in adults with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial

            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.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19

              Abstract 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.)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                sitaramkhadka5693@gmail.com , sitaram.khadka@naihs.edu.np
                Journal
                Drugs Ther Perspect
                Drugs Ther Perspect
                Drugs & Therapy Perspectives
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                1172-0360
                1179-1977
                28 October 2020
                : 1-3
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Nishtar Medical University, Multan, Pakistan
                [2 ]Shree Birendra Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal
                [3 ]Nepalese Army Institute of Health Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal
                [4 ]Mangalbare Hospital, Morang, Nepal
                [5 ]GRID grid.11173.35, ISNI 0000 0001 0670 519X, Punjab University College of Pharmacy, , University of the Punjab, ; Lahore, Pakistan
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0251-3817
                Article
                791
                10.1007/s40267-020-00791-1
                7592638
                d89f290c-af47-4ccb-a268-a99e3d00e1c4
                © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

                This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

                History
                Categories
                Commentary

                Comments

                Comment on this article