Remdesivir: A Review in COVID-19

Blair, Hannah A.

doi:10.1007/s40265-023-01926-0

Cited by 21 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 123 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the data presented herein demonstrated that the potency and toxicities of some drugs, especially NA inhibitors were cell-system dependent. This was not unexpected since different cell types may have unequal distributions of drug metabolizing enzymes and membrane transporters [ 201 ], and certain antiviral agents (e.g., remdesivir and nirmatrelvir) are substrates of the Cytochrome P450 enzymes, P-glycoprotein, and other cell membrane transporters [ 202 , 203 ]. Also, NA phosphorylation may be cell-dependent [ 138 , 139 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Hurwitz,

De,

LeCher

et al. 2024

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most repurposed drugs have proved ineffective for treating COVID-19. We evaluated median effective and toxic concentrations (EC50, CC50) of 49 drugs, mostly from previous clinical trials, in Vero cells. Ratios of reported unbound peak plasma concentrations, (Cmax)/EC50, were used to predict the potential in vivo efficacy. The 20 drugs with the highest ratios were retested in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells, and their CC50 was determined in an expanded panel of cell lines. Many of the 20 drugs with the highest ratios were inactive in human Calu-3 and Caco-2 cells. Antivirals effective in controlled clinical trials had unbound Cmax/EC50 ≥ 6.8 in Calu-3 or Caco-2 cells. EC50 of nucleoside analogs were cell dependent. This approach and earlier availability of more relevant cultures could have reduced the number of unwarranted clinical trials.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Hurwitz,

De,

LeCher

et al. 2024

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection 81 . With a significant increase in the number of cases around the world since its first appearance in 2019, the rapid spread of COVID-19 has had a major influence on human health, the economy, education, and social development worldwide 82 .…”

Section: Application Of Electrochemical Protein Sensors In the Detect...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrochemical protein biosensors for disease marker detection: progress and opportunities

Guo,

Zhao,

Huang

et al. 2024

Microsyst Nanoeng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of artificial intelligence-enabled medical health care has created both opportunities and challenges for next-generation biosensor technology. Proteins are extensively used as biological macromolecular markers in disease diagnosis and the analysis of therapeutic effects. Electrochemical protein biosensors have achieved desirable specificity by using the specific antibody–antigen binding principle in immunology. However, the active centers of protein biomarkers are surrounded by a peptide matrix, which hinders charge transfer and results in insufficient sensor sensitivity. Therefore, electrode-modified materials and transducer devices have been designed to increase the sensitivity and improve the practical application prospects of electrochemical protein sensors. In this review, we summarize recent reports of electrochemical biosensors for protein biomarker detection. We highlight the latest research on electrochemical protein biosensors for the detection of cancer, viral infectious diseases, inflammation, and other diseases. The corresponding sensitive materials, transducer structures, and detection principles associated with such biosensors are also addressed generally. Finally, we present an outlook on the use of electrochemical protein biosensors for disease marker detection for the next few years.

show abstract

“…It improves recovery time in hospitalized patients, potentially provides a mortality benefit for patients with minimal oxygen requirements, and reduces the risk of hospitalization or death in outpatients at high risk for disease progression. 9 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remdesivir versus Favipiravir in Hospitalized Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

Chavalertsakul,

Sutherasan,

Petnak

et al. 2024

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Remdesivir treatment was associated with a reduced 28-day mortality and recovery time among patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. Favipiravir is broadly used to treat COVID-19. However, various studies have had conflicting results on the efficacy of favipiravir for COVID-19. We hypothesized that remdesivir is more effective in clinical outcomes regarding the 29-day mortality rates, length of stay, and recovery rate than favipiravir in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study that included adult hospitalized COVID-19 pneumonia patients with hypoxemia. Patients were classified into two groups according to the antiviral drugs. Age, oxygen saturation, fraction of inspired oxygen, and Charlson comorbidity index were used for propensity score matching. The primary objective was to determine whether the type of antiviral agent is associated with 29-day mortality. Other outcomes were the 15-day recovery rate and the length of intensive care unit or hospital stay. Results A total of 249 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia were included. With an adjustment for propensity score-matched, there were 204 patients for further analysis (102 patients in each antiviral drug group). Remdesivir patients had higher Radiographic Assessment of Lung Edema (RALE) scores on Chest X-ray (14.32±9.08 vs 11.34±8.46; standardized mean difference =33.9%). The Charlson Comorbidity Index Scores were comparable. The prevalences of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and non-HIV immunocompromised state were higher in the remdesivir group. Regarding the primary outcomes, after adjusting by diabetes, obesity, and RALE score, there was no difference in the 29-day mortality rate between both groups [26 patients (25.5%) in the remdesivir group vs 28 patients (27.5%) in the favipiravir group]. The Kaplan-Meier curve analysis at 29 days indicated no significant difference in cumulative survival rate. The two groups’ adjusted hazard ratio was 0.72; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.25, p =0.24. A Kaplan-Meier analysis on the 15-day cumulative survival rate observed a trend towards a higher survival rate in the remdesivir group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.84; p= 0.02) The proportion of patients who recovered on day 15, the length of intensive care unit(ICU) stays, and the hospital stay were not different between remdesivir and favipiravir groups (62 patients (60.8%) vs 56 patients (54.9%), p=0.39; 11.48 ± 11.88 days vs 10.87 ± 9.31 days, p =0.69; and 16.64±14.28 days vs 16.59 ±11.31 days, p =0.98, respectively). Conclusion In patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 pneumonia, Remdesivir did not demonstrate superior benefits over Favipiravir regarding 29-day mortality, 15-day recovery rates, or hospital and ICU stay lengths. However, further investigation into the 15-day cumulativ...

show abstract

Remdesivir: A Review in COVID-19

Cited by 21 publications

References 123 publications

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Why Certain Repurposed Drugs Are Unlikely to Be Effective Antivirals to Treat SARS-CoV-2 Infections

Electrochemical protein biosensors for disease marker detection: progress and opportunities

Remdesivir versus Favipiravir in Hospitalized Patients with Moderate to Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About