Fighting Omicron epidemic in China: Real-world big data from Fangcang shelter hospital during the outbreak in Shanghai 2022

Ye, Lingying; Li, Wing Fai; Shao, Jinsong; Zhang, Xu; Ju, Jiang; Xu, Huji

doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2022.07.006

Cited by 31 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This trial was performed in Shanghai, China, during an outbreak of Covid-19 (March through June 2022) involving more than 600,000 infections. 21 SARS-CoV-2 genomic analysis of specimens from 129 patients in this period showed the BA.2.2 sublineage in all of them, 20 which suggests that the major variant involved in our trial was omicron. In this population, the median time to sustained clinical recovery or symptom resolution in both trial groups was shorter than those reported in other trials, such as those evaluating REGEN-COV (14 days) 22 and bamlanivimab with or without etesevimab (8 days).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

VV116 versus Nirmatrelvir–Ritonavir for Oral Treatment of Covid-19

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Nirmatrelvir–ritonavir has been authorized for emergency use by many countries for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, the supply falls short of the global demand, which creates a need for more options. VV116 is an oral antiviral agent with potent activity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods We conducted a phase 3, noninferiority, observer-blinded, randomized trial during the outbreak caused by the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant of SARS-CoV-2. Symptomatic adults with mild-to-moderate Covid-19 with a high risk of progression were assigned to receive a 5-day course of either VV116 or nirmatrelvir–ritonavir. The primary end point was the time to sustained clinical recovery through day 28. Sustained clinical recovery was defined as the alleviation of all Covid-19–related target symptoms to a total score of 0 or 1 for the sum of each symptom (on a scale from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater severity; total scores on the 11-item scale range from 0 to 33) for 2 consecutive days. A lower boundary of the two-sided 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio of more than 0.8 was considered to indicate noninferiority (with a hazard ratio of >1 indicating a shorter time to sustained clinical recovery with VV116 than with nirmatrelvir–ritonavir). Results A total of 822 participants underwent randomization, and 771 received VV116 (384 participants) or nirmatrelvir–ritonavir (387 participants). The noninferiority of VV116 to nirmatrelvir–ritonavir with respect to the time to sustained clinical recovery was established in the primary analysis (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.35) and was maintained in the final analysis (median, 4 days with VV116 and 5 days with nirmatrelvir–ritonavir; hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.36). In the final analysis, the time to sustained symptom resolution (score of 0 for each of the 11 Covid-19–related target symptoms for 2 consecutive days) and to a first negative SARS-CoV-2 test did not differ substantially between the two groups. No participants in either group had died or had had progression to severe Covid-19 by day 28. The incidence of adverse events was lower in the VV116 group than in the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir group (67.4% vs. 77.3%). Conclusions Among adults with mild-to-moderate Covid-19 who were at risk for progression, VV116 was noninferior to nirmatrelvir–ritonavir with respect to the time to sustained clinical recovery, with fewer safety concerns. (Funded by Vigonvita Life Sciences and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05341609 ; Chinese Clinical Trial Registry number, ChiCTR2200057856.)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

VV116 versus Nirmatrelvir–Ritonavir for Oral Treatment of Covid-19

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shanghai, as the largest economic center and metropolitan city in China, is always facing greater pressure of SARS-CoV-2 importation from abroad. Although the strict implementation of dynamic zero strategies against SARS-CoV-2 infection is in effect in China, the sudden surge of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant caused a large wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Shanghai, China, since the late February, 2022 1 , 2 . The outbreaks of Omicron variant peaked in April, despite the strict implementation of lockdown.…”

Section: Dear Editormentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and virological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2.2 variant outbreaks during April to May, 2022, Shanghai, China

Li²,

Wei³

et al. 2022

Journal of Infection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recent letter published in this journal provided the data of COVID-19 naturally recovered cases at the Fangcang shelter hospital, a type of basic medical facility converted from public space to handle asymptomatic cases or low-risk patients with mild symptoms, during the current Omicron outbreak in Shanghai. 1 Since early 2022, the fasting spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has fueled a surge in newly-diagnosed cases across China, with the majority occurring in Shanghai. 2 According to the Shanghai Municipal Health Commission, as of May 4, 2022, more than 600,000 people have been infected, most of them with the Omicron BA.2 variant.…”

Section: Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%