Monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has been previously exploited for viral infections, such as respiratory syncytial virus pneumonia and Ebolavirus disease. In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, early signals of efficacy from convalescent plasma therapy have encouraged research and development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 mAbs. While many candidates are in preclinical development, we focus here on anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing mAbs (or mAb cocktails) that represent the late-stage clinical pipeline, i.e., those currently in Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials. We describe the structure, mechanism of action, and ongoing trials for VIR-7831, LY-CoV555, LY-CoV016, BGB-DXP593, REGN-COV2, and CT-P59. We speculate also on the next generation of these mAbs.

Sars-CoV-2 complications include pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which require intensive care unit admission. These conditions have rapidly overwhelmed healthcare systems, with detrimental effects on the quality of care and increased mortality. Social isolation strategies have been implemented worldwide with the aim of reducing hospital pressure. Among therapeutic strategies, the use of immunomodulating drugs, to improve prognosis, seems promising. Particularly, since pneumonia and ARDS are associated with a cytokine storm, drugs belonging to therapeutic classes as anti-IL-6, anti-TNF, and JAK inhibitors are currently studied. In this article, we discuss the potential advantages of the most promising pharmacological approaches.

Introduction: In the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, research has been oriented toward the development of therapies that could cure critically ill patients and treatments that can reduce the number of hospitalized patients, in order to ease the pressure on health-care systems. Bamlanivimab, developed from human convalescent plasma, was the first monoclonal antibody to become available for emergency use in several countries. Expectations related to its use in COVID-19 patients as a single agent have been largely disregarded, especially against E484K-carrying SARS-CoV-2 variants. Areas covered: In this drug discovery case history, the development of the drug is described starting from the identification and selection of the antibody, from the pre-clinical and clinical trials up to the post-authorization phase. Expert opinion: Bamlanivimab has shown some efficacy in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Initially approved as a monotherapy, due to poor efficacy it is currently only usable in combination with etesevimab. Pharmacokinetic limitations and mainly the onset of SARS-CoV-2 variants are the main reasons for this limited clinical use. The use in preventing hospitalization also has ethical limits related to the sustainability of care, especially if, considering similar effectiveness, bamlanivimab is compared with convalescent plasma.

Direct-acting SARS-CoV-2 antiviral monoclonal antibodies have been an integral part of therapeutic strategies implemented to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the monoclonal strategy was jeopa...

This study is aimed at describing tofacitinib and baricitinib users by characterizing their prescription and healthcare histories, drug and healthcare utilization patterns, and direct costs from a healthcare system perspective. This retrospective cohort study was performed using Tuscan administrative healthcare databases, which selected two groups of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) incident users (index date) from 1st January 2018 to 31 December 2019 and from 1 January 2018 to 30 June 2019. We included patients ≥18 years old, at least 10 years of data, and six months of follow-up. In the first analysis, we describe mean time, standard deviation (SD), from the first-ever disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) to the JAKi, and costs of healthcare facilities and drugs in the 5 years preceding the index date. In the second analysis, we assessed Emergency Department (ED) accesses and hospitalizations for any causes, visits, and costs in the follow-up. In the first analysis, 363 incident JAKi users were included (mean age 61.5, SD 13.6; females 80.7%, baricitinib 78.5%, tofacitinib 21.5%). The time to the first JAKi was 7.2 years (SD 3.3). The mean costs from the fifth to the second year before JAKi increased from 4325 € (0; 24,265) to 5259 € (0; 41,630) per patient/year, driven by hospitalizations. We included 221 incident JAKi users in the second analysis. We observed 109 ED accesses, 39 hospitalizations, and 64 visits. Injury and poisoning (18.3%) and skin (13.8%) caused ED accesses, and cardiovascular (69.2%) and musculoskeletal (64.1%) caused hospitalizations. The mean costs were 4819 € (607.5; 50,493) per patient, mostly due to JAKi. In conclusion, the JAKi introduction in therapy occurred in compliance with RA guidelines and the increase in costs observed could be due to a possible selective prescription.

Scanty information on clustering longitudinal real-world data is available in the medical literature about the adherence implementation phase in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To identify and characterize trajectories by analyzing the implementation phase of adherence to biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (DMARDs), we conducted a retrospective cohort drug-utilization study using Tuscan administrative databases. RA patients were identified by a validated algorithm, including the first biologic DMARD supply from 2010 to 2015, RA specialist visit in the year before or after the first supply date and RA diagnosis in the five years before or in the year after the first supply date. We observed users for three years or until death, neoplasia, or pregnancy. We evaluated adherence quarterly through the Medication Possession Ratio. Firstly, we identified adherence trajectories and described the baseline characteristics; then, we focused on the trajectory most populated to distinguish the related sub-trajectories. We identified 952 first ever-biologic DMARD users in RA (712 females, mean age 52.7 years old, standard deviation 18.8). The biologic DMARD mostly supplied was etanercept (387 users) followed by adalimumab (233). Among 935 users with at least 3 adherence values, we identified 49 fully-adherent users, 829 continuous users, and 57 early-discontinuing users. Significant differences were observed among the index drugs. After focusing on the continuous users, three sub-trajectories were identified: continuous-steady users (556), continuous-alternate users (207), and continuous-declining users (66). No relevant differences emerged at the baseline. The majority of first ever-biologic DMARD users showed a continuous adherence behavior in RA. The role of adherence potential predictors and the association with effectiveness and safety outcomes should be explored by further studies.