💊Exciting news today about another oral therapy for early COVID: reduced hospitalization & mortality.
Here’s a Deep dive 🧵 on the new PF-07321332 protease inhibitor (“Paxlovid”) & the very impressive results announced from the EPIC-HR trial.
TL/DR: this is a big deal. 1/
What the heck is PF-07321332?
All coronaviruses produce a polypeptide that must be cleaved by a protease into 11 proteins. Without this protease the virus can’t co-opt cellar machinery & reproduce.
PF-07321332 Inhibits the viral main protease (Mpro). 2/
Specifically PF-07321332 binds to the catalytic site of Mpro.
Mpro is a great target because there are unique features of Mpro not found in *any* human enzymes & because spike protein mutations wouldn’t confer resistance.
In contrast to other SARS-CoV-2 drugs (remdesivir, Molnupiravir) which are nucleoside analogs, protease inhibition (PI) should have fewer off target effects. (E.g. No risk of mutagenesis).
Building on work with SARS-CoV1 (which has a 100% identical Mpro catalytic site) researchers developed potent covalent inhibitors of the viral Mpro: PF-07321332
After development of candidate Mpro inhibitors in vitro, the drug showed promise in mouse models.🐁
First in human trials (NCT04756531) began in February 2021. These studies found an effective Cmax and tolerable AE profile.🤞 5/ medrxiv.org/content/10.110…
The Evaluation of Protease Inhibition in COVID-19 High Risk Patients (EPIC-HR) study was begun in July 2021.
It was a n=3000 blinded RCT comparing PF-07321332 vs placebo. It was performed at 359 sites in the 🇺🇸 & other countries (🇧🇷🇨🇴🇯🇵 🇲🇾🇰🇷 & others) 6/ clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04…
Sidebar: Why combine w/ ritonavir esp since lopinavir/ritonavir wasn't effective against COVID19?
They added Ritonavir not for anti-viral effects but to "boost" drug levels of PF-07321332 by inhibiting CYP3A. We do something analogous w/ "ritonavir boosted darunavir" in HIV.
7/
EPIC-HR enrolled "high risk" COVID19 patient w/i 5 days of symptoms.
Notably they are doing similar trials in standard risk pts (EPIC-SR) & post exposure prophylaxis (EPIC-PEP) 8/
The primary endpoint of EPIC-HR was hospitalization or death within 28 days of randomization.
Secondary endpoints were pretty much what you'd expect (resolution of symptoms, clearance of virus, longer term outcomes, and adverse effects). 9/
The trial record and statistical plan seem normal & rigorous.
As far as I can see no🚩 in the study design or protoocl changes. (admittedly I'm reading quickly & having worked overnight in the ICU!) 10/
The results of PF-07321332 vs placebo were impressive! So impressive that EPIC-HR was stopped early by IDMC/FDA at interim analysis.
Hospitalizations
6/607 (1%) vs 41/612 (6.7%) [p<0.0001]
Overall this was an 89% reduction in the composite outcome of death/hospitalization.
A NNT of 17 to prevent a hospitalization & a NNT of 62 to prevent a death.
& the pre-specified subgroup of patients who presented sooner (within 3 days of symptom onset) did even better.
12/
Only limited safety data provided:
Of 1881 pts, side effects "most of which were mild" were 19% w/ PF-07321332 vs 21% w/ placebo
There were fewer severe AEs w/ drug than placebo: 1.7% vs. 6.6%, & discontinuation due to side effect was more common with placebo: 2.1% vs. 4.1% 13/
Bottom line:
-the anti-viral PF-07321332 seems promising in vitro
-there were significant reductions in hospitalizations & mortality in a large phase 2/3 RCT; these are clinically meaningful effects
-I'm excited to see more data when they go to the FDA later this month!
14/14
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🚨Results of the #ITECH RCT in Malaysia 🇲🇾 are in & it’s yet another NEGATIVE result for ivermectin:
-n=500 high risk outpatients w/COVID randomized to 0.4 mg/kg IVM x5 days vs SOC
-no difference in rate of progression or time to recovery
-3x more adverse events w/ ivermectin 1/
We don’t have the full results yet but based on the 🇲🇾 Ministry of Health data this was a NEGATIVE trial.
- IVM recipients did numerically worse: 21.2% progressed to severe disease vs 17.9% receiving SOC (OR 1.29 CI 0.8-2.0)
- time to progression was similar: 2.9 vs 3 days 3/
If you think no one is getting rich off of ivermectin, definitely don't watch this video from FLCCC founder Dr. Fred Wagshul.
For just $276 (cash only, no insurance), this quack will prescribe ivermectin "no questions asked." Don't worry he's got "plenty of product."
Yikes! 1/
His website makes it really clear.
You just fill out this form (including your SSN) and send it to a not at all sketchy gmail address.
Then you pay $211 for a 3 minute phone call and get your prescription. Plus $75 for a followup. Then $75 recurring every 6 months. 2/
There are quite a few 🚩 on this website.
Aside from referring to $276 telehealth prescriptions for ivermectin as "preventive maintenance" this pulmonologist is also apparently an expert in... interstitial cystitis?
So pulm and urology under one roof. Not at all sketchy. 3/
Interesting results from the #TOGETHER RCT of #fluvoxamine vs placebo in n=1497 high risk outpatients in 🇧🇷 with #COVID:
-people who received fluvoxamine were less likely to require extended ED visit or hospitalization (11% vs 16%, RR 0.68 CI 0.52-0.88) thelancet.com/journals/langl… 1/
TOGETHER was a large, multi-arm adaptive platform DB-RCT done in 🇧🇷 Brazil from June 2020 to Jan 2021.
Patients were identified after testing positive, stratified by age (>50 or <50 yo) & randomized to fluvoxamine 100 mg BID x 10 days vs placebo.
2/
It builds upon 2 studies:
-an observational study in 🇫🇷 that found better outcomes among inpts already taking SSRIs nature.com/articles/s4138…
-a small n=152 RCT done in 🇺🇸 showing a decrease in clinical deterioration among outpts randomized to Fluvoxamine jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/… 3/
I’m old enough to remember when the #cultOfVitaminC claimed it was unethical to do more RCTs of vitamin C in sepsis. Now the #CultOfIvermectin is making the same claims about ivermectin in COVID.
Charlatans & quacks don’t like RCTs. Especially when they disprove snake oil. 1/
I guess this shouldn’t come as a surprise; It’s the exact same people (Marik et)
After vitamin C as a miracle cure imploded in January 2020 they decided to go double or nothing on a different miracle cure: ivermectin.
2/
It should come as no surprise that they are making literally identical arguments about ivermectin that they made about their last miracle cure:
“I’ve seen it work thousands of times”
“Real world medicine”
“unethical to do RCTs”
Any negative study must be “designed to fail”
3/
A new paper is circulating, leading to a new & improbable claim that "ivermectin treats staph aureus."
There is absolutely no evidence that this is true.
A short thread about pharmacology (MICs, IC50s, and Cmax) explaining why this claim is so unlikely. 1/
This paper by Ashraf et al is an in vitro study of repurposed meds on MRSA & MSSA.
Right off the bat, there are weird things going on. They grew 21 strains and report results for...2
And when they treated those strains with ivermectin, they used some insanely high doses...
2/
How high?
They found the minimum inhibitor conc (MIC) to kill MSSA was 12.5 ug/mL
How high is that? Let's do some math:
Ivermectin has two forms B1a & B1b. The average MW is 868 g/mol.Converting 12.5 ug/mL mass concentration to molar concentration we get 14 uM! Yikes! 3/
To the ivermectin die hards asking "What about Uttar Pradesh?!?" Perhaps you can answer the question "Why *ONLY* Uttar Pradesh?"
You realize that IVM was tried and failed in Peru, Brazil, & elsewhere. Why have the benefits of IVM *never* been seen in RCTs or other countries?
1/
Alternatively, perhaps the "Uttar Pradesh Miracle" has to do with proven interventions: lockdown, curfew, mask mandate, testing/quarantine, & vaccines.
There's also major under-reporting in UP. (Unless you think IVM has decreased deaths from car accidents & cancer too). 2/
To those saying UP "was only 5% vaccinated" when cases started to drop, realize that vaccinating frontline people can/does reduce transmission & vaccinating high risk people reduces mortality.
If you are looking for why cases REMAIN low, UP is >50% partially vaxxed right now
3/