Post-exposure lopinavir-ritonavir prophylaxis versus surveillance for individuals exposed to SARS-CoV-2: the COPEP pragmatic open-label, cluster randomized trial
Date Issued
2021-01-01
Author(s)
Smit, M.
Petignat, I.
Perneger, T.
Marinosci, A.
Ustero, P.
Diniz Ribeiro, M. P.
Faré, P. B.
Andrey, D. O.
Jacquerioz, F.
Lebowitz, D.
Agoritsas, T.
Meyer, B.
Spechbach, H.
Salamun, J.
Guessous, I.
Chappuis, F.
Kaiser, L.
Decosterd, L. A.
Grinsztejn, B.
Bernasconi, E.
Cardoso, S. W.
Calmy, A.
Team, Ftcs
DOI
10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101188
Abstract
Background: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, no direct antiviral treatment is effective as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) was repurposed as a potential PEP agent against COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic open-label, parallel, cluster-randomised superiority trial in four sites in Switzerland and Brazil between March 2020 to March 2021. Clusters were randomised to receive LPV/r PEP (400/100 mg) twice daily for 5 days or no PEP (surveillance). Exposure to SARS-CoV-2 was defined as a close contact of >15 minutes in /=2 hours with a person with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary outcome is the occurrence of COVID-19 defined by a SARS-CoV-2 infection (positive oropharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 PCR and/or a seroconversion) and >/=1 compatible symptom within 21 days post-enrolment. ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04364022); Swiss National Clinical Trial Portal: SNCTP 000003732. Findings: Of 318 participants, 157 (49.4%) were women; median age was 39 (interquartile range, 28-50) years. A total of 209 (179 clusters) participants were randomised to LPV/r PEP and 109 (95 clusters) to surveillance. Baseline characteristics were similar, with the exception of baseline SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity, which was 3-fold more frequent in the LPV/r arm (34/209 [16.3%] vs 6/109 [5.5%], respectively). During 21-day follow-up, 48/318 (15.1%) participants developed COVID-19: 35/209 (16.7%) in the LPV/r group and 13/109 (11.9%) in the surveillance group (unadjusted hazard ratio 1.44; 95% CI, 0.76-2.73). In the primary endpoint analysis, which was adjuted for baseline imbalance, the hazard ratio for developing COVID-19 in the LPV/r group vs surveillance was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.29-1.26; p =0.18). Interpretation: The role of LPV/r as PEP for COVID-19 remains unanswered. Although LPV/r over 5 days did not significantly reduce the incidence of COVID-19 in exposed individuals, we observed a change in the directionality of the effect in favour of LPV/r after adjusting for baseline imbalance. LPV/r for this indication merits further testing against SARS-CoV-2 in clinical trials. Funding: Swiss National Science Foundation (project no.: 33IC30_166819) and the Private Foundation of Geneva University Hospitals (Edmond Rothschild (Suisse) SA, Union Bancaire Privee and the Fondation pour la recherche et le traitement medical).
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
20220727164853_62e150552256b.pdf
Size
639.71 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):d6ae223dbbad54137039d19c2bcb4cdd