Post-hoc safety analysis of intramuscular adintrevimab for COVID-19 prophylaxis reports tolerability data

Introduction: Public and regulatory scrutiny of immunization safety has intensified in recent years. The COVID-19 pandemic has been instrumental in this. The accelerated timeline of COVID-19 vaccine development combined with the amplification of resultant side effects have proven corrosive to confidence. Unsurprisingly, COVID-19 vaccine uptake has declined year-on-year. This conflicts with the threat that infection still presents: predictors and prognoses of post-acute complications remain uncertain. Restoring public trust in these technologies will require meaningful progress in the availability and accessibility of clinical safety and pharmacovigilance data. Methods: Expanding upon recent comparisons of COVID-19 vaccine reactogenicity, we present a post-hoc safety analysis of adintrevimab, an intramuscular (IM) anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike recombinant investigational monoclonal antibody (mAb) for the pre-exposure and post-exposure prophylaxis of COVID-19, as assessed by the multi-center, double-blind, Phase 2/3 randomized placebo-controlled EVADE study (NCT04859517). Exploratory endpoints included the incidence of [≥]1 systemic symptoms within 7 days of study drug administration as well as symptom number, duration and severity. Safety reporting encompassed solicited and unsolicited treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), vital signs, and clinical laboratory assessments. Results: EVADE study participants (n=2582) were randomized between April 2021 - January 2022. Baseline characteristics were balanced across treatment groups. Within the 7 day post-dose period, 25/1241 (2.0%) of adintrevimab recipients and 12/1242 (1.0%) of placebo recipients reported at least one systematic TEAE. Multiple systemic TEAEs were less prevalent, with 0.3% and 0.1% reporting two systemic TEAEs, and 0.1% and 0.1% reporting three TEAEs in adintrevimab and placebo groups, respectively. The majority of TEAEs reported were mild to moderate in severity, primarily involving headache (0.4% adintrevimab, 0.8% placebo), fatigue (adintrevimab 0.4%, placebo 0.2%), and nausea/vomiting (adintrevimab 0.4%, placebo 0.1%). For those participants who experienced any TEAEs in the 7 day post-dose period, mean (+/- standard deviation) number of systemic symptoms was 1.2 (0.5) for adintrevimab and 1.3 (0.6) for placebo with symptoms consistently resolving within 3 days. Conclusions: Increased expectations for pharmaceutical safety data generation are to be welcomed, offering patients the information they need to appropriately weigh the benefits and risks of any novel therapeutic. These analysis results support the high tolerability of IM-administered adintrevimab, with reactogenicity data broadly comparable to placebo. While the co-administration of vaccines and monoclonal antibodies limit direct comparisons between historical safety reports, the findings such as these demonstrate the potential clinical value of controlled head-to-head studies such as the anticipated LIBERTY trial.