Back

Comparative effectiveness of sotrovimab versus no treatment in non-hospitalised high-risk patients with COVID-19 in North West London: aretrospective cohort study using the Discover dataset

Drysdale, M.; Galimov, E. R.; Yarwood, M. J.; Patel, V.; Levick, B.; Gibbons, D. C.; Watkins, J. D.; Young, S.; Pierce, B. F.; Lloyd, E. J.; Kerr, W.; Birch, H. J.; Kamalati, T.; Brett, S. J.

2023-07-27 infectious diseases
10.1101/2023.07.26.23293188 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionThere is uncertainty regarding how in vitro antibody neutralisation activity translates to the clinical efficacy of sotrovimab against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, although real-world evidence has demonstrated continued effectiveness during both BA.2 and BA.5 predominance. We previously reported descriptive results from the Discover dataset for patients treated with sotrovimab, nirmatrelvir/ritonavir or molnupiravir, or patients at highest risk per National Health Service (NHS) criteria but who were untreated. This study sought to assess the effectiveness of sotrovimab compared with no early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment in highest-risk patients with COVID-19. MethodsRetrospective cohort study using the Discover dataset in North West London. Patients had to be non-hospitalised at index, aged [&ge;]12 years old and meet [&ge;]1 of the NHS highest-risk criteria for receiving early COVID-19 treatment with sotrovimab. The primary objective was to assess the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalisation and/or COVID-19-related death within 28 days of the observed/imputed treatment date between patients treated with sotrovimab and highest-risk patients who received no early COVID-19 treatment. We also performed subgroup analyses for patients aged <65 and [&ge;]65 years, patients with renal dysfunction, and by Omicron subvariant prevalence period (BA.1/2 emergence: 1 December 2021-12 February 2022 [period 1]; BA.2 reaching and at its peak: 13 February-31 May 2022 [period 2]; BA.2 falling and BA.4/5 emergence: 1 June-31 July 2022 [period 3]). Inverse probability of treatment weighting based on propensity scores was used to adjust for measured known and likely confounders between the cohorts. Cox proportional hazards models with stabilised weights were performed to assess hazard ratios (HRs). ResultsA total of 599 highest-risk patients treated with sotrovimab and 5,191 untreated highest-risk patients were included. Compared with untreated patients, sotrovimab treatment reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death by 50% (HR=0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24, 1.06); however, statistical significance was not reached (p=0.07). In addition, sotrovimab reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation by 57% (HR=0.43; 95% CI 0.18, 1.00) compared with the untreated group, although also not statistically significant (p=0.051). Among patients aged [&ge;]65 years and patients with renal disease, sotrovimab treatment was associated with a significantly reduced risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation, by 89% (HR=0.11; 95% CI 0.02, 0.82; p=0.03) and 82% (HR=0.18; 95% CI 0.05, 0.62; p=0.007), respectively. In period 1, sotrovimab treatment was associated with a 75% lower risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death compared with the untreated group (HR=0.25; 95% CI 0.07, 0.89; p=0.032). In periods 2 and 3, HRs of COVID-19 hospitalisation or death were 0.53 (95% CI 0.14, 2.00; p=0.35) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.23, 2.69; p=0.69), respectively, for the sotrovimab versus untreated groups, but differences were not statistically significant. ConclusionsSotrovimab treatment was associated with a significant reduction in risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation in patients aged [&ge;]65 years and those with renal disease compared with the untreated cohort. For the overall cohort, the risk of hospitalisation following sotrovimab treatment was also lower compared with the untreated group; however, this did not achieve statistical significance (p=0.051). The risk of hospitalisation and/or death was lower for the sotrovimab-treated cohort across all time periods but did not reach significance for periods 2 and 3.

Matching journals

The top 14 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.