Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) has been declared a global pandemic and urgent treatment and prevention strategies are needed. Nitazoxanide, an anthelmintic drug, has been shown to exhibit in vitro activity against SARS‐CoV‐2. The present study used physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling to inform optimal doses of nitazoxanide capable of maintaining plasma and lung tizoxanide exposures above the reported SARS‐CoV‐2 EC₉₀.Methods: A whole‐body PBPK model was validated against available pharmacokinetic data for healthy individuals receiving single and multiple doses between 500 and 4000 mg with and without food. The validated model was used to predict doses expected to maintain tizoxanide plasma and lung concentrations above the EC₉₀ in >90% of the simulated population. PopDes was used to estimate an optimal sparse sampling strategy for future clinical trials.Results: The PBPK model was successfully validated against the reported human pharmacokinetics. The model predicted optimal doses of 1200 mg QID, 1600 mg TID and 2900 mg BID in the fasted state and 700 mg QID, 900 mg TID and 1400 mg BID when given with food. For BID regimens an optimal sparse sampling strategy of 0.25, 1, 3 and 12 hours post dose was estimated.Conclusion: The PBPK model predicted tizoxanide concentrations within doses of nitazoxanide already given to humans previously. The reported dosing strategies provide a rational basis for design of clinical trials with nitazoxanide for the treatment or prevention of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. A concordant higher dose of nitazoxanide is now planned for investigation in the seamless phase I/IIa AGILE trial.

COVID-19 is a spectrum of clinical symptoms in humans caused by infection with SARS-CoV-2. The coalescence of SARS-CoV-2 with seasonal respiratory viruses, particularly influenza viruses, is a global health concern. To understand this, transgenic mice expressing the human ACE2 receptor (K18-hACE2) were infected with influenza A virus (IAV) followed by SARS-CoV-2 and the host response and effect on virus biology was compared to K18-hACE2 mice infected with IAV or SARS-CoV-2 alone. The sequentially infected mice showed reduced SARS-CoV-2 RNA synthesis, yet exhibited more rapid weight loss, more severe lung damage and a prolongation of the innate response compared to the singly infected or control mice. Sequential infection also exacerbated the extrapulmonary encephalitic manifestations associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conversely, prior infection with a commercially available, multivalent live-attenuated influenza vaccine (Fluenz Tetra) elicited the same reduction in SARS-CoV-2 RNA synthesis, albeit without the associated increase in disease severity. This suggests that the innate immune response stimulated by IAV inhibits SARS-CoV-2. Interestingly, infection with an attenuated, apathogenic influenza vaccine does not result in an aberrant immune response and enhanced disease severity. Taken together, the data suggest coinfection (‘twinfection’) is deleterious and mitigation steps should be instituted as part of the comprehensive public health and management strategy of COVID-19.

The successful development of a chemoprophylaxis against SARS-CoV-2 could provide a tool for infection prevention that is implementable alongside vaccination programmes. Nafamostat is a serine protease inhibitor that inhibits SARS-CoV-2 entry in vitro, but it has not been characterised for chemoprophylaxis in animal models. Clinically, nafamostat is limited to intravenous delivery and has an extremely short plasma half-life. This study sought to determine whether intranasal dosing of nafamostat at 5 mg/kg twice daily was able to prevent the airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from infected to uninfected Syrian Golden hamsters. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detectable in the throat swabs of the water-treated control group 4 days after cohabitation with a SARS-CoV-2 inoculated hamster. However, throat swabs from the intranasal nafamostat-treated hamsters remained SARS-CoV-2 RNA negative for the full 4 days of cohabitation. Significantly lower SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations were seen in the nasal turbinates of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.001). A plaque assay quantified a significantly lower concentration of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in the lungs of the nafamostat-treated group compared to the control (p = 0.035). When taken collectively with the pathological changes observed in the lungs and nasal mucosa, these data are strongly supportive of the utility of intranasally delivered nafamostat for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations promise to deliver patient benefits by overcoming issues associated with non-adherence. A preclinical assessment of semi-solid prodrug nanoparticle (SSPN) LAI formulations of emtricitabine (FTC) is reported here. Pharmacokinetics over 28 days were assessed in Wistar rats, New Zealand white rabbits, and Balb/C mice following intramuscular injection. Two lead formulations were assessed for the prevention of an HIV infection in NSG-cmah^−/− humanised mice to ensure antiviral activities were as anticipated according to the pharmacokinetics. Cmax was reached by 12, 48, and 24 h in rats, rabbits, and mice, respectively. Plasma concentrations were below the limit of detection (2 ng/mL) by 21 days in rats and rabbits, and 28 days in mice. Mice treated with SSPN formulations demonstrated undetectable viral loads (700 copies/mL detection limit), and HIV RNA remained undetectable 28 days post-infection in plasma, spleen, lung, and liver. The in vivo data presented here demonstrate that the combined prodrug/SSPN approach can provide a dramatically extended pharmacokinetic half-life across multiple preclinical species. Species differences in renal clearance of FTC mean that longer exposures are likely to be achievable in humans than in preclinical models.

Pibrentasvir (PIB) has been demonstrated to block exonuclease activity of the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase, protecting favipiravir (FVP) and remdesivir (RDV) from post-incorporation excision and eliciting antiviral synergy in vitro. The present study investigated the chemoprophylactic efficacy of PIB, FVP, RDV, FVP with PIB, or RDV with PIB dosed intranasally twice a day, using a Syrian golden hamster contact transmission model. Compared to the saline control, viral RNA levels were significantly lower in throat swabs in FVP (day 7), RDV (day 3, 5, 7), and RDV+PIB (day 3, 5) treatment groups. Similarly, findings were evident for nasal turbinate after PIB and RDV treatment, and lungs after PIB, FVP, and FVP+PIB treatment at day 7. Lung viral RNA levels after RDV and RDV+PIB treatment were only detectable in two animals per group, but the overall difference was not statistically significant. In situ examination of the lungs confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in all animals, except for one in each of the RDV and RDV+PIB treatment groups, which tested negative in all virus detection approaches. Overall, prevention of transmission was observed in most animals treated with RDV, while other agents reduced the viral load following contact transmission. No benefit of combining FVP or RDV with PIB was observed.

Favipiravir (FVP) and remdesivir (RDV) have demonstrable antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2. Here, the efficacy of FVP, RDV, and FVP with RDV (FVP + RDV) in combination was assessed in Syrian golden hamsters challenged with SARS-CoV- 2 (B.1.1.7) following intraperitoneal administration. At day 4 post infection, viral RNA and viral antigen expression were significantly lower in lungs for all three treatment groups compared to the sham treatment. Similarly, viral titres in the lungs were lower in all treatment groups compared to the sham treatment. The FVP + RDV combination was the only treatment group where viral RNA in nasal turbinate and lung, virus titres in lung, and viral antigen expression (lung) were all lower than those for the sham treatment group. Moreover, lower viral titre values were observed in the FVP + RDV group compared to other treatment groups, albeit only significantly lower in comparison to those in the RDV-only-treated group. Further assessment of the potential utility of FVP in combination with RDV may be warranted. Future studies should also consider whether the combination of these two drugs may reduce the speed at which drug resistance mutations are selected.