Sotrovimab versus usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19: a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (RECOVERY)
Horby, P. W.; Emberson, J. R.; Peto, L.; Staplin, N.; Campbell, M.; Pessoa-Amorim, G.; Stewart, R.; Ghosh, D.; Cooke, G.; Blencowe, N.; Moreno-Cuesta, J.; Desai, P.; Hine, P.; Underwood, J.; Easom, N.; Majumdar, J.; Bhagani, S.; Baillie, J. K.; Buch, M. H.; Faust, S. N.; Jaki, T.; Jeffery, K.; Juszczak, E.; Knight, M.; Lim, W. S.; Montgomery, A.; Mukherjee, A.; Mumford, A.; Rowan, K.; Thwaites, G.; Mafham, M.; Haynes, R.; Landray, M. J.
Show abstract
BackgroundSotrovimab is a neutralising monoclonal antibody that has been proposed as a treatment for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. MethodsIn this randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial, several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonia. In the sotrovimab comparison, eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either usual care alone or usual care plus a single 1g dose of sotrovimab, using web-based unstratified randomisation. Participants were retrospectively categorised according to their baseline serum SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antigen concentration as high-antigen or low-antigen, using the median concentration as a cut-off. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality assessed by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes were time to discharge alive from hospital, and, among those not on invasive ventilation at baseline, progression to invasive ventilation or death. Recruitment closed on 31 March 2024 when funding ended. ISRCTN (50189673) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381936). FindingsFrom 4 January 2022 to 19 March 2024, 1723 patients were recruited to the sotrovimab comparison. 720 (42%) were classified as high-antigen, 717 (42%) as low-antigen, and 286 (17%) had unknown antigen status. Over 80% of patients were vaccinated, over 80% had anti-spike antibodies at randomisation, and almost all were infected with Omicron variants. In the prespecified primary efficacy population of high-antigen patients, 82/355 (23%) allocated sotrovimab versus 106/365 (29%) allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0.75; 95% CI 0.56-0.99; p=0.046). In an analysis of all randomised patients (regardless of antigen status), 177/828 (21%) allocated sotrovimab versus 201/895 (22%) allocated usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.77-1.16; p=0.60). InterpretationIn patients hospitalised with COVID-19, sotrovimab was associated with reduced mortality in the primary analysis population of patients with a high serum SARS-CoV-2 antigen concentration at baseline, but not in the overall population. FundingUK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research (Grant ref: MC_PC_19056).
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Namilumab or infliximab compared to standard of care in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (CATALYST): a phase 2 randomised adaptive trial 97%
- A randomised clinical trial of azithromycin versus standard care in ambulatory COVID-19 – the ATOMIC2 trial 96%
- Peginterferon-lambda for the treatment of COVID-19 in outpatients 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial 96%
- Convalescent plasma for outpatients with early COVID-19 95%
- Peginterferon Lambda-1a for treatment of outpatients with uncomplicated COVID-19: a randomized placebo-controlled trial 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Real-world effectiveness of molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against mortality, hospitalization, and in-hospital outcomes among community-dwelling, ambulatory COVID-19 patients during the BA.2.2 wave in Hong Kong: an observational study 92%
- Antivirals for post-exposure prophylaxis of influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis 92%
- Antivirals for treatment of severe influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 92%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.