tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Immun Inflamm Dis
. 2025 Apr;13(4):e70174.
doi: 10.1002/iid3.70174. Effectiveness and Safety of Simnotrelvir/Ritonavir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe COVID-19
Xin Chen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Xiao-Qing Lin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Fang Cheng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shi-Lin Zheng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Qiang Zhang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Te Wu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Xian-Gao Jiang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ji-Chan Shi[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Background and aim: Simnotrelvir/ritonavir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are major treatments for COVID-19, but their comparative efficacy and safety, especially in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19, remain unclear.
Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical record data. From May 30, 2023, to October 8, 2023, 115 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 were retrospectively collected from Wenzhou Central Hospital. They were treated with simnotrelvir/ritonavir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. The clinical effectiveness and adverse reactions were analyzed and compared between the two groups.
Results: A total of 115 hospitalized patients were included in the study. They were 65 (56.5%) men and 50 (43.5%) women, with a mean age of 61 years. 58 (50.4%) were treated with simnotrelvir/ritonavir and 57 (49.6%) with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. There was a similar rate of composite disease progression (10.3% vs. 7.0%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.401, p = 0.527) and mortality (5.2% vs. 3.5%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.191, p = 0.662) between the two groups. The progression rate from moderate COVID-19 to severe COVID-19 was not significantly different between the two groups (4.5% vs. 6.4%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.148, p = 0.701). Median time for hospitalization was 7.0 (6.0, 8.0) days and 9.0 (8.0, 10.0) days (p = 0.338), and time for SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion was 6.0 (6.0, 7.0) days and 7.0 (6.0, 7.0) days (p = 0.934) in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group, respectively. Among moderate patients, time for hospitalization was shorter in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group [6.0 (6.0, 7.0) vs. 8.0 (8.0, 10.0) days, log-rank p = 0.004, HR = 1.838 (95% CI 1.199-2.815)]. And 5 (8.6%) had adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group and 6 (10.5%) had ADRs in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group.
Conclusion: This is the first study comparing the effectiveness of simnotrelvir/ritonavir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in moderate and severe COVID-19 patients. Patients who received simnotrelvir/ritonavir exhibited shorter hospitalization. Disease progression, viral clearance times, and symptom resolution time were similar between the two groups.
Keywords: ADR; COVID‐19; clinical effectiveness; nirmatrelvir/ritonavir; simnotrelvir/ritonavir; small‐molecule antiviral drugs.
. 2025 Apr;13(4):e70174.
doi: 10.1002/iid3.70174. Effectiveness and Safety of Simnotrelvir/Ritonavir and Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe COVID-19
Xin Chen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Xiao-Qing Lin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Fang Cheng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Shi-Lin Zheng[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Qiang Zhang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Te Wu[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Xian-Gao Jiang[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ji-Chan Shi[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 40226977
- DOI: 10.1002/iid3.70174
Background and aim: Simnotrelvir/ritonavir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir are major treatments for COVID-19, but their comparative efficacy and safety, especially in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19, remain unclear.
Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study using electronic medical record data. From May 30, 2023, to October 8, 2023, 115 patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 were retrospectively collected from Wenzhou Central Hospital. They were treated with simnotrelvir/ritonavir or nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. The clinical effectiveness and adverse reactions were analyzed and compared between the two groups.
Results: A total of 115 hospitalized patients were included in the study. They were 65 (56.5%) men and 50 (43.5%) women, with a mean age of 61 years. 58 (50.4%) were treated with simnotrelvir/ritonavir and 57 (49.6%) with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. There was a similar rate of composite disease progression (10.3% vs. 7.0%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.401, p = 0.527) and mortality (5.2% vs. 3.5%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.191, p = 0.662) between the two groups. The progression rate from moderate COVID-19 to severe COVID-19 was not significantly different between the two groups (4.5% vs. 6.4%, χ[SUP]2[/SUP] = 0.148, p = 0.701). Median time for hospitalization was 7.0 (6.0, 8.0) days and 9.0 (8.0, 10.0) days (p = 0.338), and time for SARS-CoV-2 negative conversion was 6.0 (6.0, 7.0) days and 7.0 (6.0, 7.0) days (p = 0.934) in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group, respectively. Among moderate patients, time for hospitalization was shorter in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group [6.0 (6.0, 7.0) vs. 8.0 (8.0, 10.0) days, log-rank p = 0.004, HR = 1.838 (95% CI 1.199-2.815)]. And 5 (8.6%) had adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in the simnotrelvir/ritonavir group and 6 (10.5%) had ADRs in the nirmatrelvir/ritonavir group.
Conclusion: This is the first study comparing the effectiveness of simnotrelvir/ritonavir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in moderate and severe COVID-19 patients. Patients who received simnotrelvir/ritonavir exhibited shorter hospitalization. Disease progression, viral clearance times, and symptom resolution time were similar between the two groups.
Keywords: ADR; COVID‐19; clinical effectiveness; nirmatrelvir/ritonavir; simnotrelvir/ritonavir; small‐molecule antiviral drugs.