PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - , AU - Horby, Peter W AU - Staplin, Natalie AU - Peto, Leon AU - Emberson, Jonathan R AU - Campbell, Mark AU - Pessoa-Amorim, Guilherme AU - Basnyat, Buddha AU - Thwaites, Louise AU - Van Doorn, Rogier AU - Hamers, Raph L AU - Nel, Jeremy AU - Amuasi, John AU - Stewart, Richard AU - Ghosh, Dipansu AU - Hamilton, Fergus AU - Desai, Purav AU - Easom, Nicholas AU - Majumdar, Jaydip AU - Hine, Paul AU - Chadwick, David AU - Cooke, Graham AU - Sharp, Sara AU - Esmail, Hanif AU - Baillie, J Kenneth AU - Buch, Maya H AU - Faust, Saul N AU - Jaki, Thomas AU - Jeffery, Katie AU - Juszczak, Edmund AU - Knight, Marian AU - Lim, Wei Shen AU - Montgomery, Alan AU - Mukherjee, Aparna AU - Mumford, Andrew AU - Rowan, Kathryn AU - Thwaites, Guy AU - Mafham, Marion AU - Haynes, Richard AU - Landray, Martin J TI - Molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir versus usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial AID - 10.1101/2024.05.23.24307731 DP - 2024 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2024.05.23.24307731 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/24/2024.05.23.24307731.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/24/2024.05.23.24307731.full AB - Background Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir (Paxlovid) are oral antivirals that have been proposed as treatments for patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial, several potential treatments for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 pneumonia were evaluated. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir were assessed in separate comparisons in RECOVERY, both of which are reported here. Eligible and consenting adults could join the molnupiravir comparison, the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir comparison, or both. For each comparison, participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to the relevant antiviral (five days of molnupiravir 800mg twice daily or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir 300mg/100mg twice daily) or to usual care without the relevant antiviral drug, using web-based unstratified randomisation with allocation concealment. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, and secondary outcomes were time to discharge alive from hospital, and among those not on invasive ventilation at baseline, progression to invasive ventilation or death. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Both comparisons were stopped by the investigators because of low recruitment. ISRCTN (50189673) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381936).Findings From 24 January 2022 to 24 May 2023, 923 patients were recruited to the molnupiravir comparison (445 allocated molnupiravir and 478 allocated usual care), and from 31 March 2022 to 24 May 2023, 137 patients were recruited to the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir comparison (68 allocated nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 69 allocated usual care). More than three-quarters of the patients in both comparisons were vaccinated and had anti-spike antibodies at randomisation, and more than two-thirds were receiving other SARS-CoV-2 antivirals (including remdesivir or sotrovimab). In the molnupiravir comparison, 74 (17%) patients allocated to molnupiravir and 79 (17%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (hazard ratio [HR] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-1.28; p=0.66). In the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir comparison, 13 (19%) patients allocated nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 13 (19%) patients allocated usual care died within 28 days (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.47-2.23; p=0.96). In neither comparison was there evidence of a significant difference in the duration of hospitalisation or the proportion of patients progressing to invasive ventilation or death.Interpretation In adults hospitalised with COVID-19, neither molnupiravir nor nirmatrelvir-ritonavir were associated with reductions in 28-day mortality, duration of hospital stay, or risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death although these comparisons had limited statistical power due to low recruitment.Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health and Care Research (Grant ref: MC_PC_19056), and Wellcome Trust (Grant Ref: 222406/Z/20/Z).Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04381936 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04381936ISRCTN50189673 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN50189673Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673Funding StatementThe RECOVERY trial was supported by grants to the University of Oxford from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and NIHR (MC_PC_19056), the Wellcome Trust (Grant Ref: 222406/Z/20/Z) through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator, and by core funding provided by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, the Wellcome Trust, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, Health Data Research UK, the Medical Research Council, the NIHR Health Protection Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections, and NIHR Clinical Trials Unit Support Funding.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:Approval was given by the Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee (UK), the Ethical Review Board of the Nepal Health Research Council (Nepal), and the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Indonesia (Indonesia)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.YesThe protocol, consent form, statistical analysis plan, definition & derivation of clinical characteristics & outcomes, training materials, regulatory documents, and other relevant study materials are available online at www.recoverytrial.net. As described in the protocol, the Trial Steering Committee will facilitate the use of the study data and approval will not be unreasonably withheld. Deidentified participant data will be made available to bona fide researchers registered with an appropriate institution within 3 months of publication. However, the Steering Committee will need to be satisfied that any proposed publication is of high quality, honours the commitments made to the study participants in the consent documentation and ethical approvals, and is compliant with relevant legal and regulatory requirements (e.g. relating to data protection and privacy). The Steering Committee will have the right to review and comment on any draft manuscripts prior to publication. Data will be made available in line with the policy and procedures described at: https://www.ndph.ox.ac.uk/data-access. Those wishing to request access should complete the form at https://www.ndph.ox.ac.uk/files/about/data_access_enquiry_form_13_6_2019.docx and e-mailed to: data.access{at}ndph.ox.ac.uk