RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Effectiveness of Sotrovimab and Molnupiravir in community settings in England across the Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 sublineages: emulated target trials using the OpenSAFELY platform
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.05.12.23289914
DO 10.1101/2023.05.12.23289914
A1 ,
A1 Tazare, John
A1 Nab, Linda
A1 Zheng, Bang
A1 Hulme, William J
A1 Green, Amelia C A
A1 Curtis, Helen J
A1 Mahalingasivam, Viyaasan
A1 Higgins, Rose
A1 Schultze, Anna
A1 Bhaskaran, Krishnan
A1 Mehrkar, Amir
A1 Schaffer, Andrea
A1 Smith, Rebecca M
A1 Bates, Christopher
A1 Cockburn, Jonathan
A1 Parry, John
A1 Hester, Frank
A1 Harper, Sam
A1 Eggo, Rosalind M
A1 Walker, Alex J
A1 Marks, Michael
A1 Brown, Mike
A1 Maringe, Camille
A1 Leyrat, Clémence
A1 Evans, Stephen J W
A1 Goldacre, Ben
A1 MacKenna, Brian
A1 Sterne, Jonathan A C
A1 Tomlinson, Laurie A
A1 Douglas, Ian J
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/05/16/2023.05.12.23289914.abstract
AB Background The effectiveness of COVID-19 monoclonal antibody and antiviral therapies against severe COVID-19 outcomes is unclear. Initial benefit was shown in unvaccinated patients and before the Omicron variant emerged. We used the OpenSAFELY platform to emulate target trials to estimate the effectiveness of sotrovimab or molnupiravir, versus no treatment.Methods With the approval of NHS England, we derived population-based cohorts of non-hospitalised high-risk individuals in England testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 during periods of dominance of the BA.1 (16/12/2021-10/02/2022) and BA.2 (11/02/2022-21/05/2022) Omicron sublineages. We used the clone-censor-weight approach to estimate the effect of treatment with sotrovimab or molnupiravir initiated within 5 days after positive test versus no treatment. Hazard ratios (HR) for COVID-19 hospitalisation or death within 28 days were estimated using weighted Cox models.Results Of the 35,856 [BA.1 period] and 39,192 [BA.2 period] patients, 1,830 [BA.1] and 1,242 [BA.2] were treated with molnupiravir and 2,244 [BA.1] and 4,164 [BA.2] with sotrovimab. The estimated HRs for molnupiravir versus untreated were 1.00 (95%CI: 0.81;1.22) [BA.1] and 1.22 (0.96;1.56) [BA.2]; corresponding HRs for sotrovimab versus untreated were 0.76 (0.66;0.89) [BA.1] and 0.92 (0.79;1.06) [BA.2].Interpretation Compared with no treatment, sotrovimab was associated with reduced risk of adverse outcomes after COVID-19 in the BA.1 period, but there was weaker evidence of benefit in the BA2 period. Molnupiravir was not associated with reduced risk in either period.Funding UKRI, Wellcome Trust, MRC, NIHR and HDRUK.Competing Interest StatementAll authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: BG has received research funding to the Bennett Institute from the Bennett Foundation (ongoing), the Laura and John Arnold Foundation (past), the NIHR (ongoing), the NIHR School of Primary Care Research (past), the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (past), the Mohn-Westlake Foundation (ongoing), NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley (ongoing), the Wellcome Trust (ongoing), the Good Thinking Foundation (ongoing), Health Data Research UK (past), the Health Foundation (past), the World Health Organization (past), UKRI (ongoing), Asthma UK (past), the British Lung Foundation (past), and the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing strand of the National Core Studies programme (ongoing); he has been a Non-Executive Director at NHS Digital (past); he also receives personal income from speaking and writing for lay audiences on the misuse of science. IJD has received unrestricted research grants and holds shares in GSK. JT and AS are employed at LSHTM through an unrestricted research grant from GSK. CL is supported by the UK Medical Research Council (Skills Development Fellowship MR/T032448/1). All other authors declare no conflicts of interest.Clinical Protocols https://github.com/opensafely/mab-av-non-users/blob/main/docs/Protocol%20amendment_%20CCW%20Approach%20v1.1.pdf Funding StatementThis research used data assets made available as part of the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation (grant ref MC_PC_20058). This research was funded in whole, or in part, by the UKRI [MC_PC_20058] and the Wellcome Trust [222097/Z/20/Z]. For the purpose of Open Access, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission. In addition, the OpenSAFELY Platform is supported by grants from MRC (MR/V015757/1, MC_PC-20059, MR/W016729/1); NIHR (NIHR135559, COV-LT2-0073), and Health Data Research UK (HDRUK2021.000, 2021.0157). CL was supported by the UK Medical Research Council (Skills Development Fellowship MR/T032448/1). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS England, Public Health England or the Department of Health and Social Care. Funders had no role in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Health Research Authority (REC reference 20/LO/0651) and by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine's Ethics Board (reference 21863).I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAccess to the underlying identifiable and potentially re-identifiable pseudonymised electronic health record data is tightly governed by various legislative and regulatory frameworks, and restricted by best practice. The data in OpenSAFELY is drawn from General Practice (GP) data across England where TPP is the data processor. TPP developers initiate an automated process to create pseudonymised records in the core OpenSAFELY database, which are copies of key structured data tables in the identifiable records. These pseudonymised records are linked onto key external data resources that have also been pseudonymised via SHA-512 one-way hashing of NHS numbers using a shared salt. Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science developers and PIs holding contracts with NHS England have access to the OpenSAFELY pseudonymised data tables as needed to develop the OpenSAFELY tools. These tools in turn enable researchers with OpenSAFELY data access agreements to write and execute code for data management and data analysis without direct access to the underlying raw pseudonymised patient data, and to review the outputs of this code. All code for the full data management pipeline, from raw data to completed results for this analysis, and for the OpenSAFELY platform as a whole is available for review at github.com/OpenSAFELY. https://github.com/OpenSAFELY