Repeat subcutaneous administration of casirivimab and imdevimab in adults is well-tolerated and prevents the occurrence of COVID-19

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.10.21265889: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationSubjects: Eligible subjects were uninfected adult volunteers, aged 18–90 years, who were healthy or had chronic but stable medical conditions, without signs/symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, and who were confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 negative by central lab reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) of nasopharyngeal swab ≤72 hours of randomization.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Antibodies
    SentencesResources
    Secondary endpoints included: the proportion of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs), the proportion of subjects who achieved or exceeded the target concentration of REGEN-COV in serum (20 µg/mL) at the end of each 4-week dosing interval, and immunogenicity (measured by anti-drug antibodies [ADAs]) to REGEN-COV.
    anti-drug
    suggested: None
    Exploratory efficacy endpoints assessed the incidence and severity of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (ie, COVID-19) during the treatment and follow-up periods and the proportion of baseline anti-SARS-CoV-2 seronegative subjects who converted to seropositive for SARS-COV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies post-baseline; seroconversion from negative to positive for SARS-COV-2 anti-nucleocapsid IgG antibodies was considered indicative of an incident SARS-CoV-2 infection.
    anti-SARS-CoV-2
    suggested: None
    anti-nucleocapsid IgG
    suggested: None

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    A potential limitation of this study was that regular RT-PCR testing was not performed in all participants who presented with a clinical syndrome compatible with COVID-19. However, when only considering laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, REGEN-COV showed a 100% RRR in the development of COVID-19. The discrepancy could imply that these subjects had illnesses that were not due to SARS-CoV-2, or that sample collection was not close enough to symptom onset. An additional limitation of this study is that it was conducted before the emergence of several SARS-CoV-2 variants. However, extensive non-clinical testing has demonstrated that REGEN-COV retains its neutralization capacity against all clinically relevant viral variants tested to date, including beta, gamma, epsilon, and delta variants.10,13 Although it should not be deemed an appropriate substitute for vaccination in immunocompetent individuals, the efficacy and safety profile of REGEN-COV demonstrated in this study strongly support that REGEN-COV should be used for chronic prevention of COVID-19 in individuals not expected to mount a sufficient immune response to vaccination.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: We found the following clinical trial numbers in your paper:

    IdentifierStatusTitle
    NCT04519437Active, not recruitingStudy Assessing the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, …


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.