即便研发出效果很好的疫苗,全球范围内的新冠肺炎病例仍然有增无减。近期国内出现了零星确诊病例,而在国外,印度疫情依旧水深火热,美国的情况也不容乐观,根据约翰斯•霍普金斯大学的7日平均数据,每天有超过4万多人感染。
很多人依然对注射疫苗犹豫不决,已经接种疫苗的人偶尔也会出现感染的情况。与此同时,一些国家依旧面临着疫苗剂量不够的困境。至少在可预见的未来,新冠病毒将继续存在。
药物研发人员和公共卫生专家表示,现在需要方便操作的治疗新冠病毒的方法。只要服用类似达菲(Tamiflu,治疗季节性流感的抗病毒药)的药,就能够防止症状恶化以及住院。虽然抗体药看起来可以满足要求,但很多药需要静脉注射,很难迅速大范围普及。而如果只是吃药就方便得多。
“除非能够说服足够多的人同意接种疫苗,否则就得采取第二种方法,也就是口服抗病毒药物。”佐治亚州立大学的分子病毒学家和生化学家理查德•普伦珀表示。
针对新冠的抗病毒药作用类似于一个疗程的抗生素。医生开一盒药,之后患者在家一天吃一两片,持续五到七天。目标是希望通过吃药缓解症状,帮人们更快恢复。但是作为针对流感病毒的抗病毒药物,达菲只能缓解新冠患者的症状,但对“杀死”新冠病毒无效,并不能用来治愈患者。
目前,新冠药物的研发明显滞后于光速研发的疫苗,部分原因是抗病毒药物没有像新冠疫苗一样获得联邦政府的资金支持。
目前一些实验性药物正进行临床试验,未来几个月就能够看出疗效如何。最前沿的药名为莫那比拉韦,由默沙东和Ridgeback Biotherapeutics公司研发。根据今年3月已经公布的初步结果,公司表示新药很安全,可以显著降低未住院病人体内的病毒含量。预计不久之后公司将公布更多数据。
辉瑞不仅开发了针对新冠的mRNA疫苗,也在测试抗病毒药。首席执行官艾伯乐最近告诉美国消费者新闻与商业频道,今年年底可能推向市场。
抗击病毒
除了达菲,还有一些抗病毒药能够用于治疗艾滋病毒、疱疹、乙肝和丙肝等感染,但与市场上众多治疗细菌感染的抗生素相比,可以应付病毒的药物还很少。
药物研发人员表示,这主要是因为安全有效的抗病毒药比抗生素更难制造。病毒跟细菌不一样,细菌是独立有机体,能够自行繁殖,而病毒要找到宿主才可以传播。一旦病毒粒子进入宿主细胞,就会劫持细胞运转并开始大量复制。随后新复制的病毒传遍全身,感染更多细胞。
病毒要不断复制才能够继续感染,如果可以阻止复制过程中的某个步骤,就能够停止感染。而抗病毒药物不能完全杀死病毒,只是阻止病毒复制。
最棘手的是,让药物在抗病毒过程中只针对病毒,不能同时杀死病毒所在的细胞。抗生素就只杀死细菌细胞,不会伤害人类细胞。在开发抗病毒药物时,毒性始终是关注焦点。
“要找到病毒独特的致命弱点,在不影响宿主的情况下加以利用,确实是抗病毒治疗的主要挑战。”普伦珀称。有些抗病毒药物是直接针对病毒上的某个点进行攻克,另一些则是针对在病毒复制过程中被占用的人类蛋白进行突破。
另一个导致抗病毒药物开发挑战巨大的因素是用药的时机。“抗病毒药物需要尽早用药,确诊后就要尽快吃药。”北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的流行病学助理教授丽莎•格拉林斯基说,他参与了莫那比拉韦实验室测试。
如果病毒已经在全身大范围传播,就可能造成严重伤害。抗病毒药可以抗击病毒,但不能够逆转对组织造成的损害。病人必须在出现症状几天内迅速确诊,这导致招募患者参加临床试验很困难。因为很多新冠病例都是轻症,如果患者的症状不太严重,他们就可能没有动力自愿参加新药试验。
目前,吉利德的瑞德西韦是唯一获批治疗新冠肺炎的抗病毒药,主要通过输液治疗住院患者。不过还没有证据显示该药能够救命,但确实缩短了康复者的好转时间。由于疗效不明,世界卫生组织建议不要使用该药常规治疗。吉利德正研发吸入式或药片式瑞德西韦,供患者在家服用。
如果确实有效,抗病毒药甚至可以作为预防措施,提供给有感染新冠病毒风险的高危人群。
蓄势待发
莫那比拉韦最初由埃默里大学发现,在这场抗病毒竞赛中一马当先,因为研究人员已经在实验室研究其对抗多种病毒的效用。
在疫情爆发之前,普伦珀发现该药能够抑制流感病毒,而且北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的研究人员发现,它也可以有效抑制其他冠状病毒,例如中东综合呼吸症病毒(MERS)和非典肺炎(SARS)病毒。
格拉林斯基称:“我们强烈地感觉到,这种药物也能够对抗 SARS-CoV-2病毒,因为我们已经知道其显效机理。”
莫那比拉韦是一种核糖核苷类似物药物。其工作原理是引诱病毒的基因在复制时产生大量错误或发生变异。当变异达到一定数量之后,病毒便无法继续存活。
去年,总部位于迈阿密的Ridgeback Biotherapeutics公司授权使用莫那比拉韦——当时名为 EIDD-2801——进行人体安全性初步实验。公司如今正在与默沙东合作,开展大规模研究,并将其用于住院和门诊新冠患者。上个月,公司停止了莫那比拉韦的人体实验,称这些患者不大可能从该药受益。
与此同时,Atea Pharmaceuticals还对一款抗病毒药进行了重新定位。这款名为AT-527的药物最初是针对丙肝病患开发的。上个月,公司启动了三期实验,在1400名轻中度门诊新冠肺炎患者的身上测试该药。
辉瑞在其药物方面采取了更具针对性的做法。辉瑞的药物设计负责人夏洛特•阿勒顿称,去年3月,公司成立了一支团队,设计了一种专门用于对抗SARS-CoV-2病毒的分子。7月,该团队发现另一种潜在的分子,并将其命名为PF-07321332。
该药物能够与名为蛋白酶的病毒酶结合,从而阻止病毒复制。作为蛋白酶抑制剂,这些药物在治疗其他病毒方面一直十分有效,例如艾滋病和丙肝,既可以单独使用,也能够与其他抗病毒药联合使用。
本月,辉瑞启动了初期实验,在健康成年人身上测试药物的安全性。阿勒顿称,公司计划在夏季之前招募新冠肺炎患者参加药物疗效研究。
由于该药物可以直接作用于病毒,因此人们对蛋白酶抑制剂的一个顾虑在于,如果病毒的靶向部分发生变异,SARS-CoV-2就可能会对该药产生抗药性。阿勒顿称,她的团队将跟踪SARS-CoV-2变种,以寻找可能会导致药物疗效降低的蛋白酶变异点。
她说:“由于报道的变异程度很低,因此我们当前并不认为它们会引发公司抗病毒药物的疗效问题。”
小型生物科技公司Selva Therapeutics与Clear Creek Bio正在开发或许能够避免抗药性的药物,因为这种药物针对的是宿主,并非病毒。Selva的药物由加州大学圣迭戈分校授权,可以抑制在人类肺部和其他细胞中发现的一种酶,从而阻碍病毒的入侵。
Clear Creek的药物布喹那于数年前购于百时美施贵宝公司,也是一种酶的抑制剂,能够让病毒无法从宿主细胞盗取复制所需的遗传物质。
位于马萨诸塞州剑桥市的Clear Creek Bio公司的联合创始人与首席执行官维克拉姆•希尔•库玛说:“疫情爆发后,令我们感到震惊的想法是,该药可能具有应对抗药性的特性。”公司于去年11月开始了门诊患者的布喹那中期实验。
不止于新冠病毒
大多数现有药物仅针对特定病毒。然而,诸如莫那比拉韦这类拥有广谱抗病毒特性的实验药物依然有望被用于对抗多种病毒。科学家将这些药物看作是抵抗病毒的杀手锏,因为它们或许能够治疗未来出现的病毒。毕竟,SARS-CoV-2病毒是过去20年中第三种爆发的冠状病毒,而在蝙蝠和其他动物中传播的已知冠状病毒多达数百种。
格拉林斯基称:“我们不敢去想第四种病毒到来之时会发生什么事情,但提前做好准备和谋划不失为一种明智的做法。如果我们拥有这些具有广谱抗病毒特性的药物,即便只是那些完成了开发并准备进行测试的药物,那么我们也有希望避免另一场大规模疫情。”
新冠疫情爆发后没有抗病毒药物可用的一个主要原因在于,业界并未研制出应对非典肺炎或中东综合呼吸症的药物。当这些疫情得到迅速控制后,药物和疫苗开发基本上处于停滞状态。
新冠病毒抗病毒药物最终是否会投放大众市场,取决于联邦政府和私人领域的投资。“曲速行动”向疫情医疗防护领域注入了180亿美元的资金,然而绝大多数资金流向了疫苗开发。特朗普政府的计划并未投资新的抗病毒药物。
2020年 4月,美国国立卫生研究院推出了一个名为“加速新冠病毒治疗干预和疫苗”(ACTIV)的举措,然而,该项目主要专注于重新定位现有抗病毒药物,而不是发现新药。
位于圣迭戈的Selva Therapeutics公司的首席执行官及联合创始人泰德•达利称,需要投入更多的资金来加速药物的上市过程。
他说:“对于那些不仅能够解决当前人们所面临的公共卫生危机,而且还可以作为武器应对未来新涌现病毒的药物,公共卫生领域当然会对其开发举措表示支持。”
然而在开发艾滋病这类慢性感染的抗病毒药物方面,大型制药公司的积极性并不高。大多数呼吸道病毒会引发轻症,而且感染会在数天内恢复。这种短期感染的抗病毒药物没有任何经济效益可言。
位于西雅图的哈钦森癌症研究中心负责莫那比拉韦实验的感染病医师与研究人员伊丽莎白•杜克说:“他们希望为糖尿病、高血压研发药物,他们希望研发出人们长期需要的药物,而不是仅使用5天的药物。”
然而杜克认为,新冠病毒可能成为医药行业的一个转折点。疫情显示,呼吸系统病毒可能比流感或普通感冒更致命。即便拥有有效的疫苗,SARS-CoV-2病毒依然可能留存于世。然而,抗病毒可以帮助把病毒引发的致命威胁,降低为能够居家治疗的可控感染。(财富中文网)
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
即便研发出效果很好的疫苗,全球范围内的新冠肺炎病例仍然有增无减。近期国内出现了零星确诊病例,而在国外,印度疫情依旧水深火热,美国的情况也不容乐观,根据约翰斯•霍普金斯大学的7日平均数据,每天有超过4万多人感染。
很多人依然对注射疫苗犹豫不决,已经接种疫苗的人偶尔也会出现感染的情况。与此同时,一些国家依旧面临着疫苗剂量不够的困境。至少在可预见的未来,新冠病毒将继续存在。
药物研发人员和公共卫生专家表示,现在需要方便操作的治疗新冠病毒的方法。只要服用类似达菲(Tamiflu,治疗季节性流感的抗病毒药)的药,就能够防止症状恶化以及住院。虽然抗体药看起来可以满足要求,但很多药需要静脉注射,很难迅速大范围普及。而如果只是吃药就方便得多。
“除非能够说服足够多的人同意接种疫苗,否则就得采取第二种方法,也就是口服抗病毒药物。”佐治亚州立大学的分子病毒学家和生化学家理查德•普伦珀表示。
针对新冠的抗病毒药作用类似于一个疗程的抗生素。医生开一盒药,之后患者在家一天吃一两片,持续五到七天。目标是希望通过吃药缓解症状,帮人们更快恢复。但是作为针对流感病毒的抗病毒药物,达菲只能缓解新冠患者的症状,但对“杀死”新冠病毒无效,并不能用来治愈患者。
目前,新冠药物的研发明显滞后于光速研发的疫苗,部分原因是抗病毒药物没有像新冠疫苗一样获得联邦政府的资金支持。
目前一些实验性药物正进行临床试验,未来几个月就能够看出疗效如何。最前沿的药名为莫那比拉韦,由默沙东和Ridgeback Biotherapeutics公司研发。根据今年3月已经公布的初步结果,公司表示新药很安全,可以显著降低未住院病人体内的病毒含量。预计不久之后公司将公布更多数据。
辉瑞不仅开发了针对新冠的mRNA疫苗,也在测试抗病毒药。首席执行官艾伯乐最近告诉美国消费者新闻与商业频道,今年年底可能推向市场。
抗击病毒
除了达菲,还有一些抗病毒药能够用于治疗艾滋病毒、疱疹、乙肝和丙肝等感染,但与市场上众多治疗细菌感染的抗生素相比,可以应付病毒的药物还很少。
药物研发人员表示,这主要是因为安全有效的抗病毒药比抗生素更难制造。病毒跟细菌不一样,细菌是独立有机体,能够自行繁殖,而病毒要找到宿主才可以传播。一旦病毒粒子进入宿主细胞,就会劫持细胞运转并开始大量复制。随后新复制的病毒传遍全身,感染更多细胞。
病毒要不断复制才能够继续感染,如果可以阻止复制过程中的某个步骤,就能够停止感染。而抗病毒药物不能完全杀死病毒,只是阻止病毒复制。
最棘手的是,让药物在抗病毒过程中只针对病毒,不能同时杀死病毒所在的细胞。抗生素就只杀死细菌细胞,不会伤害人类细胞。在开发抗病毒药物时,毒性始终是关注焦点。
“要找到病毒独特的致命弱点,在不影响宿主的情况下加以利用,确实是抗病毒治疗的主要挑战。”普伦珀称。有些抗病毒药物是直接针对病毒上的某个点进行攻克,另一些则是针对在病毒复制过程中被占用的人类蛋白进行突破。
另一个导致抗病毒药物开发挑战巨大的因素是用药的时机。“抗病毒药物需要尽早用药,确诊后就要尽快吃药。”北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的流行病学助理教授丽莎•格拉林斯基说,他参与了莫那比拉韦实验室测试。
如果病毒已经在全身大范围传播,就可能造成严重伤害。抗病毒药可以抗击病毒,但不能够逆转对组织造成的损害。病人必须在出现症状几天内迅速确诊,这导致招募患者参加临床试验很困难。因为很多新冠病例都是轻症,如果患者的症状不太严重,他们就可能没有动力自愿参加新药试验。
目前,吉利德的瑞德西韦是唯一获批治疗新冠肺炎的抗病毒药,主要通过输液治疗住院患者。不过还没有证据显示该药能够救命,但确实缩短了康复者的好转时间。由于疗效不明,世界卫生组织建议不要使用该药常规治疗。吉利德正研发吸入式或药片式瑞德西韦,供患者在家服用。
如果确实有效,抗病毒药甚至可以作为预防措施,提供给有感染新冠病毒风险的高危人群。
蓄势待发
莫那比拉韦最初由埃默里大学发现,在这场抗病毒竞赛中一马当先,因为研究人员已经在实验室研究其对抗多种病毒的效用。
在疫情爆发之前,普伦珀发现该药能够抑制流感病毒,而且北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的研究人员发现,它也可以有效抑制其他冠状病毒,例如中东综合呼吸症病毒(MERS)和非典肺炎(SARS)病毒。
格拉林斯基称:“我们强烈地感觉到,这种药物也能够对抗 SARS-CoV-2病毒,因为我们已经知道其显效机理。”
莫那比拉韦是一种核糖核苷类似物药物。其工作原理是引诱病毒的基因在复制时产生大量错误或发生变异。当变异达到一定数量之后,病毒便无法继续存活。
去年,总部位于迈阿密的Ridgeback Biotherapeutics公司授权使用莫那比拉韦——当时名为 EIDD-2801——进行人体安全性初步实验。公司如今正在与默沙东合作,开展大规模研究,并将其用于住院和门诊新冠患者。上个月,公司停止了莫那比拉韦的人体实验,称这些患者不大可能从该药受益。
与此同时,Atea Pharmaceuticals还对一款抗病毒药进行了重新定位。这款名为AT-527的药物最初是针对丙肝病患开发的。上个月,公司启动了三期实验,在1400名轻中度门诊新冠肺炎患者的身上测试该药。
辉瑞在其药物方面采取了更具针对性的做法。辉瑞的药物设计负责人夏洛特•阿勒顿称,去年3月,公司成立了一支团队,设计了一种专门用于对抗SARS-CoV-2病毒的分子。7月,该团队发现另一种潜在的分子,并将其命名为PF-07321332。
该药物能够与名为蛋白酶的病毒酶结合,从而阻止病毒复制。作为蛋白酶抑制剂,这些药物在治疗其他病毒方面一直十分有效,例如艾滋病和丙肝,既可以单独使用,也能够与其他抗病毒药联合使用。
本月,辉瑞启动了初期实验,在健康成年人身上测试药物的安全性。阿勒顿称,公司计划在夏季之前招募新冠肺炎患者参加药物疗效研究。
由于该药物可以直接作用于病毒,因此人们对蛋白酶抑制剂的一个顾虑在于,如果病毒的靶向部分发生变异,SARS-CoV-2就可能会对该药产生抗药性。阿勒顿称,她的团队将跟踪SARS-CoV-2变种,以寻找可能会导致药物疗效降低的蛋白酶变异点。
她说:“由于报道的变异程度很低,因此我们当前并不认为它们会引发公司抗病毒药物的疗效问题。”
小型生物科技公司Selva Therapeutics与Clear Creek Bio正在开发或许能够避免抗药性的药物,因为这种药物针对的是宿主,并非病毒。Selva的药物由加州大学圣迭戈分校授权,可以抑制在人类肺部和其他细胞中发现的一种酶,从而阻碍病毒的入侵。
Clear Creek的药物布喹那于数年前购于百时美施贵宝公司,也是一种酶的抑制剂,能够让病毒无法从宿主细胞盗取复制所需的遗传物质。
位于马萨诸塞州剑桥市的Clear Creek Bio公司的联合创始人与首席执行官维克拉姆•希尔•库玛说:“疫情爆发后,令我们感到震惊的想法是,该药可能具有应对抗药性的特性。”公司于去年11月开始了门诊患者的布喹那中期实验。
不止于新冠病毒
大多数现有药物仅针对特定病毒。然而,诸如莫那比拉韦这类拥有广谱抗病毒特性的实验药物依然有望被用于对抗多种病毒。科学家将这些药物看作是抵抗病毒的杀手锏,因为它们或许能够治疗未来出现的病毒。毕竟,SARS-CoV-2病毒是过去20年中第三种爆发的冠状病毒,而在蝙蝠和其他动物中传播的已知冠状病毒多达数百种。
格拉林斯基称:“我们不敢去想第四种病毒到来之时会发生什么事情,但提前做好准备和谋划不失为一种明智的做法。如果我们拥有这些具有广谱抗病毒特性的药物,即便只是那些完成了开发并准备进行测试的药物,那么我们也有希望避免另一场大规模疫情。”
新冠疫情爆发后没有抗病毒药物可用的一个主要原因在于,业界并未研制出应对非典肺炎或中东综合呼吸症的药物。当这些疫情得到迅速控制后,药物和疫苗开发基本上处于停滞状态。
新冠病毒抗病毒药物最终是否会投放大众市场,取决于联邦政府和私人领域的投资。“曲速行动”向疫情医疗防护领域注入了180亿美元的资金,然而绝大多数资金流向了疫苗开发。特朗普政府的计划并未投资新的抗病毒药物。
2020年 4月,美国国立卫生研究院推出了一个名为“加速新冠病毒治疗干预和疫苗”(ACTIV)的举措,然而,该项目主要专注于重新定位现有抗病毒药物,而不是发现新药。
位于圣迭戈的Selva Therapeutics公司的首席执行官及联合创始人泰德•达利称,需要投入更多的资金来加速药物的上市过程。
他说:“对于那些不仅能够解决当前人们所面临的公共卫生危机,而且还可以作为武器应对未来新涌现病毒的药物,公共卫生领域当然会对其开发举措表示支持。”
然而在开发艾滋病这类慢性感染的抗病毒药物方面,大型制药公司的积极性并不高。大多数呼吸道病毒会引发轻症,而且感染会在数天内恢复。这种短期感染的抗病毒药物没有任何经济效益可言。
位于西雅图的哈钦森癌症研究中心负责莫那比拉韦实验的感染病医师与研究人员伊丽莎白•杜克说:“他们希望为糖尿病、高血压研发药物,他们希望研发出人们长期需要的药物,而不是仅使用5天的药物。”
然而杜克认为,新冠病毒可能成为医药行业的一个转折点。疫情显示,呼吸系统病毒可能比流感或普通感冒更致命。即便拥有有效的疫苗,SARS-CoV-2病毒依然可能留存于世。然而,抗病毒可以帮助把病毒引发的致命威胁,降低为能够居家治疗的可控感染。(财富中文网)
译者:冯丰
审校:夏林
Even with highly effective vaccines, cases of COVID-19 are still happening in the U.S. More than 40,000 people a day are being diagnosed with the disease, based on a seven-day average of Johns Hopkins University data.
Many people remain hesitant about getting the shot, and breakthrough infections can occasionally occur in those who are vaccinated. Meanwhile, some countries don’t have enough vaccine doses. COVID-19 is likely here to stay—at least for the foreseeable future.
Drug developers and public health experts say what’s needed now is an easy-to-take treatment for COVID-19. A pill akin to Tamiflu—an antiviral for seasonal influenza—could prevent people with symptoms from getting worse and ending up in the hospital. Antibody drugs have been shown to do just that, but these drugs need to be given via an IV, making them difficult to deploy quickly to a large number of people. A pill would be far more convenient.
“Unless we can persuade enough people to agree to vaccination, we are going to need a second approach, and oral antivirals can give us that,” says Richard Plemper, a molecular virologist and biochemist at Georgia State University.
An antiviral pill for COVID-19 would work similarly to a course of antibiotics. Your doctor would prescribe a pack of pills, and you’d take one or two a day for five to seven days while you stay at home. The hope is that a pill would alleviate symptoms and help people bounce back from the infection faster. When Tamiflu is taken within 48 hours, it speeds recovery time by a day.
The search for a coronavirus pill has lagged behind the light-speed development of vaccines in part because antivirals haven’t gotten the same influx of cash from the federal government that COVID-19 vaccines have.
A handful of experimental pills are now being tested in clinical trials, and the next few months will reveal whether any of them are effective. At the forefront is a drug called molnupiravir, developed by Merck and Ridgeback Biotherapeutics. In preliminary results announced in March, the company said the pill was safe and significantly reduced viral loads in nonhospitalized adults. The companies are expected to release more data soon.
Pfizer, which developed one of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19, is also testing an antiviral pill. CEO Albert Bourla told CNBC recently that the drug could be available by the end of the year.
Thwarting the virus
Beyond Tamiflu, antivirals are available to treat infections like HIV, herpes, and hepatitis B and C, but that’s a short list compared to the numerous antibiotics on the market for bacterial infections.
Drug developers say it’s because safe and effective antivirals are just trickier to make than antibiotics. Unlike bacteria, which are independent organisms that can reproduce on their own, viruses need to find a host in order to spread. Once a virus particle slips inside a host cell, it hijacks the cell’s machinery and starts churning out copies of itself. The new copies then travel throughout the body, infecting more cells.
All viruses need to keep replicating to continue the infection, so if you can block one of the steps in this replication process, then you can halt the infection. Antivirals don’t kill viruses outright; they just prevent the virus from replicating.
What’s tricky is targeting the virus during this process without also killing the cells where the virus resides. Antibiotics kill only bacterial cells, not human ones. But when developing antivirals, toxicity is always a concern.
“Finding the unique Achilles’ heel of the virus that we can exploit without affecting the host, that is really the major challenge for antiviral therapy,” Plemper says. Some do this by directly targeting a site on the virus. Others target human proteins that get commandeered in the viral replication process.
Another factor that makes antiviral development challenging is the timing of the drug. “Antiviral drugs need to be given very early, very rapidly after someone's been diagnosed,” says Lisa Gralinski, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who’s been involved in lab tests of molnupiravir.
If the virus has already spread widely throughout the body, it can start inflicting serious damage. An antiviral can stop the virus, but it can’t reverse the damage that it’s already done to tissue. Patients have to be diagnosed quickly—within a few days of developing symptoms—making enrolling participants for clinical trials difficult. Many cases of COVID-19 are mild, and if patients aren’t very sick yet, they may not be motivated to volunteer for an experimental drug trial.
Currently, Gilead’s remdesivir is the only antiviral approved for COVID-19, and it’s given as an infusion to hospitalized patients. The drug hasn’t been shown to save lives, but it does shorten the recovery time for those who get better. But because of the unclear benefits, the World Health Organization has recommended against its use as a routine treatment. Gilead is looking to create an inhaled or pill version of remdesivir that patients could take at home.
If they work, antivirals could even be prescribed as a preventive measure to high-risk individuals exposed to COVID-19.
In the pipeline
Molnupiravir—originally invented at Emory University—got a head start in the antiviral race because researchers were already studying it against several viruses in the lab. Before the pandemic hit, Plemper had discovered that the drug inhibited influenza viruses, and researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill found that it was effective against other coronaviruses like MERS and SARS.
“We had a strong inkling that it would work against SARS-CoV-2 because we already knew its mechanism of action,” Gralinski says.
Molnupiravir is a type of drug known as a nucleoside analog. It works by tricking the virus into making lots of mistakes, or mutations, in its genome when it replicates. The virus accumulates so many mutations that it can’t survive.
Last year, Miami-based Ridgeback Biotherapeutics licensed molnupiravir—then called EIDD-2801—for initial human safety trials. The company is now collaborating with Merck on larger studies to test the pill in both hospitalized and nonhospitalized COVID-19 patients. Last month, the companies stopped the trial of molnupiravir in hospitalized patients, saying that those individuals are unlikely to benefit from the drug.
Meanwhile, Atea Pharmaceuticals is also repurposing an antiviral. Its pill, called AT-527, was originally developed for the hepatitis C virus. Last month the company launched a Phase III trial to test the drug in 1,400 nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.
Pfizer is taking a more tailored approach with its pill. In March of last year, the company formed a team to design a molecule to specifically fight SARS-CoV-2, says Charlotte Allerton, head of medicinal design at Pfizer. By July, the team had identified a promising molecule that it dubbed PF-07321332.
The drug blocks viral replication by binding to a viral enzyme called a protease. Known as protease inhibitors, these drugs have been effective at treating other viruses, such as HIV and hepatitis C, both alone and in combination with other antivirals.
This March, Pfizer began an early-stage trial to test the safety of the drug in healthy adults. Allerton says the company plans to recruit COVID-19 patients for efficacy studies by summer.
Since it acts directly on the virus, one concern with a protease inhibitor is that SARS-CoV-2 could become resistant to the drug if the targeted part of the virus mutates. Allerton says her team is tracking SARS-CoV-2 variants to look for mutations in the protease that could potentially make the drug less effective.
“While there are low levels of mutations reported, we're not currently expecting them to cause any issue in terms of the antiviral efficacy of our molecule,” she says.
Small biotech firms Selva Therapeutics and Clear Creek Bio are developing pills that may be able to evade drug resistance because they act on host cells rather than the virus. Selva’s drug, which it licensed from the University of California, San Diego, inhibits an enzyme found in human lungs and other cells to block viral entry. Clear Creek’s drug brequinar, which it acquired a few years ago from Bristol Myers Squibb, inhibits an enzyme that starves the virus of its ability to steal genetic material from the host cell, which it needs for replication.
“What really struck us when the pandemic emerged was the idea that this could be resistance resistant,” says Vikram Sheel Kumar, cofounder and CEO of Clear Creek Bio, which is based in Cambridge, Mass. The company began a mid-stage trial of brequinar in nonhospitalized patients in November.
Beyond COVID-19
Most available antivirals work only against a specific virus. But there’s hope for experimental drugs known as broad-spectrum antivirals, like molnupiravir, to be used against a wide range of viruses. Scientists see these drugs as the holy grail of antivirals because of their potential to treat future viruses that emerge. After all, SARS-CoV-2 is the third coronavirus outbreak in the past 20 years, and hundreds more coronaviruses are known to be circulating in bats and other animals.
“We don't want to imagine that possible fourth one coming, but it would be smart to be prepared for it and plan in advance,” Gralinski says. “If we have these broadly acting drugs available, or even ones that are most of the way through development and are ready for future testing, hopefully we could avoid another pandemic.”
A major reason why there were no antivirals ready to go when the COVID-19 pandemic hit was because no drugs for SARS or MERS had ever been developed. When those outbreaks were contained quickly, drug and vaccine development came to a virtual halt.
Whether COVID-19 antivirals will ever make it to the masses will depend on investment from the federal government and private industry. Operation Warp Speed provided an infusion of $18 billion into medical countermeasures against the pandemic, but the vast majority of that money went toward vaccine development. The Trump administration program didn’t invest in new antivirals.
In April 2020, the National Institutes of Health did launch an effort called Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines, or ACTIV, but that program has mostly focused on repurposing existing antivirals, not discovering new ones.
Ted Daley, CEO and cofounder of Selva Therapeutics in San Diego, says more investment in antivirals is needed to speed these drugs to patients.
“There’s certainly a common public health interest in supporting the development efforts of drugs that not only address the current public health crisis that we're in but could also be a tool in the arsenal next time one of these viruses pops up,” he says.
And Big Pharma has had little interest in developing antivirals beyond chronic infections like HIV. Most respiratory viruses cause mild illness, and infections clear up within a few days. The economics of antivirals for short-lived infections didn’t make sense.
“They want to make drugs for diabetes. They want to make drugs for hypertension. They want to make things that you will need forever, not something that you need for five days,” says Elizabeth Duke, an infectious disease physician and researcher at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle who’s overseeing a trial there of molnupiravir.
But Duke thinks COVID-19 could be a turning point for the pharmaceutical industry. The pandemic has shown that respiratory viruses can be far more deadly than the flu or common cold. Even with effective vaccines, SARS-CoV-2 is likely here to stay. But antivirals could help reduce the virus from a deadly menace to a manageable infection that we could largely fight at home.