The clinical effectiveness of REGEN-COV in SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron versus Delta variants
Background In vitro studies suggesting that REGEN-COV (casirivimab plus imdevimab monoclonal antibodies) had poor efficacy against Omicron-variant SARS-CoV-2 infection led to amendment of REGEN-COV’s Emergency Use Authorization to recommend use only in regions without high Omicron prevalence. REGEN-...
Saved in:
Published in | PloS one Vol. 17; no. 12 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
02.12.2022
|
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Background In vitro studies suggesting that REGEN-COV (casirivimab plus imdevimab monoclonal antibodies) had poor efficacy against Omicron-variant SARS-CoV-2 infection led to amendment of REGEN-COV’s Emergency Use Authorization to recommend use only in regions without high Omicron prevalence. REGEN-COV’s relative clinical effectiveness for Omicron is unknown. Methods and findings We conducted a retrospective cohort study of non-hospitalized adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction at the University of Miami Health System from July 19 –November 21, 2021 (Delta period) and December 6, 2021 –January 7, 2022 (Omicron period). Subjects were stratified be REGEN-COV receipt within 72h of test positivity and by time period of infection. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the differential association of REGEN-COV receipt with hospitalization within 30 days (primary outcome) and ED presentation; all models included three exposure terms (REGEN-COV receipt, Omicron vs Delta period, interaction of REGEN-COV with time period) and potential confounders (vaccination status, vaccine boosting, cancer diagnosis). Our cohort consisted of 2,083 adults in the Delta period (213 [10.2%] received REGEN-COV) and 4,201 in the Omicron period (156 [3.7%] received REGEN-COV). Hospitalization was less common during the Omicron period than during Delta (0.9% vs 1.7%, p = 0.78) and more common for patients receiving REGEN-COV than not (5.7% vs 0.9%, p<0.001). After adjustment, we found no differential association of REGEN-COV use during Omicron vs Delta with hospitalization within 30d (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for the interaction term: 2.31 [0.76–6.92], p = 0.13). Similarly, we found no differential association for hospitalization within 15d (2.45 [0.63–9.59], p = 0.20) or emergency department presentation within 30d (1.43 [0.57–3.51], p = 0.40) or within 15d (1.79 [0.65–4.82], p = 0.30). Conclusions Within the limitations of this study’s power to detect a difference, we identified no differential effectiveness of REGEN-COV in the context of Omicron vs Delta SARS-CoV-2 infection. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Background In vitro studies suggesting that REGEN-COV (casirivimab plus imdevimab monoclonal antibodies) had poor efficacy against Omicron-variant SARS-CoV-2 infection led to amendment of REGEN-COV’s Emergency Use Authorization to recommend use only in regions without high Omicron prevalence. REGEN-COV’s relative clinical effectiveness for Omicron is unknown. Methods and findings We conducted a retrospective cohort study of non-hospitalized adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction at the University of Miami Health System from July 19 –November 21, 2021 (Delta period) and December 6, 2021 –January 7, 2022 (Omicron period). Subjects were stratified be REGEN-COV receipt within 72h of test positivity and by time period of infection. We constructed multivariable logistic regression models to assess the differential association of REGEN-COV receipt with hospitalization within 30 days (primary outcome) and ED presentation; all models included three exposure terms (REGEN-COV receipt, Omicron vs Delta period, interaction of REGEN-COV with time period) and potential confounders (vaccination status, vaccine boosting, cancer diagnosis). Our cohort consisted of 2,083 adults in the Delta period (213 [10.2%] received REGEN-COV) and 4,201 in the Omicron period (156 [3.7%] received REGEN-COV). Hospitalization was less common during the Omicron period than during Delta (0.9% vs 1.7%, p = 0.78) and more common for patients receiving REGEN-COV than not (5.7% vs 0.9%, p<0.001). After adjustment, we found no differential association of REGEN-COV use during Omicron vs Delta with hospitalization within 30d (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for the interaction term: 2.31 [0.76–6.92], p = 0.13). Similarly, we found no differential association for hospitalization within 15d (2.45 [0.63–9.59], p = 0.20) or emergency department presentation within 30d (1.43 [0.57–3.51], p = 0.40) or within 15d (1.79 [0.65–4.82], p = 0.30). Conclusions Within the limitations of this study’s power to detect a difference, we identified no differential effectiveness of REGEN-COV in the context of Omicron vs Delta SARS-CoV-2 infection. |
Author | Sankalp Das Dipen J. Parekh Samira Patel Tanira Ferreira Bhavarth Shukla Hayley B. Gershengorn |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 fullname: Hayley B. Gershengorn – sequence: 2 fullname: Samira Patel – sequence: 3 fullname: Tanira Ferreira – sequence: 4 fullname: Sankalp Das – sequence: 5 fullname: Dipen J. Parekh – sequence: 6 fullname: Bhavarth Shukla |
BookMark | eNotjN9OwjAcRhujiYC-gRd9gWL_bGt3SSYiCZEEkNul7X6TktGSdmB8exf16ss5-XLG6NYHDwg9MTplQrLnY7hEr7vpedBTyqWSkt6gESsFJwWn4h6NUzpSmgtVFCNkdgfAtnPeWd1haFuwvbuCh5RwaPFmvpi_k2q9x87j7WyzJVXYEz7Q7zF4_OX6A16fnI0DXCGmS8Iv0PUaX3V02vfpAd21ukvw-L8T9PE631VvZLVeLKvZijSMckYMhbyQlhpeMKNAQ5tznuuW6YJb0egyU9TkUpa05FJI1eQyUxkYbk3LVa7EBC3_uk3Qx_oc3UnH7zpoV_-KED9rHXtnO6iHagaQsdI2IitKaUA0ghqgZsgpRsUPjUFlmg |
ContentType | Journal Article |
DBID | DOA |
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0278770 |
DatabaseName | Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitleList | |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Sciences (General) |
EISSN | 1932-6203 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_af14ee419cd34697be3d30be0bb2c810 |
GroupedDBID | --- 123 29O 2WC 3V. 53G 5VS 7RV 7X2 7X7 7XC 88E 8AO 8C1 8CJ 8FE 8FG 8FH 8FI 8FJ A8Z AAFWJ ABDBF ABIVO ABJCF ABUWG ACGFO ACIHN ACIWK ACPRK ADBBV AEAQA AENEX AFKRA AFRAH AHMBA ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AOIJS APEBS ARAPS ATCPS BAWUL BBNVY BBORY BCNDV BENPR BGLVJ BHPHI BKEYQ BPHCQ BVXVI BWKFM CCPQU CS3 D1I D1J D1K DIK DU5 E3Z EAP EAS EBD EMOBN ESTFP ESX EX3 F5P FPL FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HCIFZ HH5 HMCUK HYE IAO IEA IHR IHW INH INR IOV IPY ISE ISR ITC K6- KB. KQ8 L6V LK5 LK8 M0K M1P M48 M7P M7R M7S M~E NAPCQ O5R O5S OK1 P2P P62 PATMY PDBOC PIMPY PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO PTHSS PV9 PYCSY RNS RPM RZL SV3 TR2 UKHRP WOQ WOW ~02 ~KM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-d1021-b0e567c0b261b8eaef5225af1a62c3da9480b57790927378d57484eb2cbf28583 |
IEDL.DBID | M48 |
IngestDate | Tue Oct 22 15:15:03 EDT 2024 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 12 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-d1021-b0e567c0b261b8eaef5225af1a62c3da9480b57790927378d57484eb2cbf28583 |
OpenAccessLink | http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0278770 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_af14ee419cd34697be3d30be0bb2c810 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2022-12-02 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2022-12-02 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 12 year: 2022 text: 2022-12-02 day: 02 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationTitle | PloS one |
PublicationYear | 2022 |
Publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
Publisher_xml | – name: Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
SSID | ssj0053866 |
Score | 2.448039 |
Snippet | Background In vitro studies suggesting that REGEN-COV (casirivimab plus imdevimab monoclonal antibodies) had poor efficacy against Omicron-variant SARS-CoV-2... |
SourceID | doaj |
SourceType | Open Website |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV09b8IwELUqpi5V6Yf6LQ8d2sGQ2HHsjJRCUaWCBAWxRT7HkSq1ARXo7--ZGImtS7fIQyLd0zn37HfvCLmPY2W1sMBK4BIJSsaZkQoY5iSPXaJBW3808DZMB9PkdS7ne6O-vCastgeuA9c2ZZw4l8SZLQRSOQVOFCICFwFwq0NzVZTtyFS9B2MWp2lolBMqbgdcWstF5Vr-rk354cR7Jv3bv0n_mByFMpB26s83yYGrTkgzJNqKPgQ36MdTAggk3fUv0lp-EXYouijpuPfSG7LuaEY_KjrpjCesu5gxTnciq4r6k1Y6-vLCu4p6EcZmRZ_d59rQH-TJXgZzRqb93nt3wMJgBFb4SdwMIidTZSNA-gPaGVdiFSUxUiblVhQmS3QE0jsJZlidKF1I7xiKHNpCybXU4pw0KgzFBaGRMZgmhqvSqKRItTaiiMvM4lPqMptckicfpXxZe1_k3o16u4AY5QGj_C-Mrv7jJdfkkPvWAy8l4Teksf7euFssCNZwt8X-F87jtH4 priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals |
Title | The clinical effectiveness of REGEN-COV in SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron versus Delta variants |
URI | https://doaj.org/article/af14ee419cd34697be3d30be0bb2c810 |
Volume | 17 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV3NS8MwFA9DL17E-YGfIwcPesho07RJDyJzdg7BDTY3ditJmoow27kP0Yt_uy9dKwh681JCIQ285DXvl_ze7yF07rpcC08rkirqA0AJKZE-VwR8krqGCSW0PRp46AXdEbuf-JMaqmq2lgZc_ArtbD2p0XzafH_9uAaHvyqqNnC36tSc5Zlp2ps0zgHEb1IGWN2S-dj3vQJ4dxCUCXR_9fwh3l_sMp0dtF2Gh7i1ns86qplsF9VLB1zgi1Il-nIPKZhgXOU14jUto_xz4TzFg-gu6pF2f4yfMzxsDYaknY8JxRX5KsP2BBb3XywhL8OWnLFa4FszXUr8BvjZ0mP20agTPba7pCyYQBJboZsox_gB144CWKSEkSaF6MqXqSsDqr1Ehkw4yrcKgyFELVwkvlUSBWytVUqFL7wDtJGBKQ4RdqQE95GUp5KzJBBCeombhhpagQk1O0I31krxbK2JEVuV6uJFPn-Ky0Ufw8jMGOaGOvEAhnNlvMRzlHEUDClc5_g_PnKCtqhNSbAUE3qKNpbzlTmDQGGpGgXAbhQrwD4_oy8nQcCg |
link.rule.ids | 315,783,787,867,2109,24330,27936,27937 |
linkProvider | Scholars Portal |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+clinical+effectiveness+of+REGEN-COV+in+SARS-CoV-2+infection+with+Omicron+versus+Delta+variants&rft.jtitle=PloS+one&rft.au=Hayley+B.+Gershengorn&rft.au=Samira+Patel&rft.au=Tanira+Ferreira&rft.au=Sankalp+Das&rft.date=2022-12-02&rft.pub=Public+Library+of+Science+%28PLoS%29&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=12&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0278770&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_af14ee419cd34697be3d30be0bb2c810 |