ArticleViruses2024
Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab: Still a Valid Prophylaxis against COVID-19 New Variants?
Article in Viruses, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Receptor Binding for the Entry Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2: Insights from the Original Strain and Emerging Variants.Viruses · 2025Review
- Immunogenicity and safety of tixagevimab-cilgavimab for COVID-19 pre-exposure prophylaxis in immunocompromised 20 to <40 kg children and adolescents: A pilot, prospective, open-labeled study.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- From Detection to Protection: Antibodies and Their Crucial Role in Diagnosing and Combatting SARS-CoV-2.Vaccines · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundthis study aims to evaluate the efficacy of tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld™) against various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including newer Omicron sublineages, in an immunocompromised cohort and in vitro. STUDY
designConducted in Italy, this research involves immunocompromised patients who received Evusheld. It evaluates serum neutralization activity against different SARS-CoV-2 strains (20A.EU1, BA.5, BQ.1, XBB.1.5, XBB.1.16, and EG.5) before (T0), after 14 (T1), and after 30 (T2) days from the tixagevimab/cilgavimab injection. Furthermore, the in vitro activity of Evusheld against SARS-CoV-2 VOCs was evaluated.
resultsThe cohort was composed of 72 immunocompromised patients. The serum neutralizing activity of tixagevimab/cilgavimab-treated patients was notably lower against newer variants such as BQ.1, XBB.1.5, XBB.1.16, and EG.5. Then, the in vitro study detailed specific EC50 values to quantify the activity of tixagevimab/cilgavimab against various SARS-CoV-2 VOCs. Newer variants like BQ.1 and XBB.1.5 exhibited notably lower neutralization, underscoring the challenges in effectively countering the evolving virus. Interestingly, tixagevimab/cilgavimab maintained reduced but still valid activity against EG.5 with an EC50 of 189 ng/mL and Cmax/EC90 of 110.7.
conclusionsTixagevimab/cilgavimab efficacy wanes against novel subvariants. This underscores the critical need for ongoing adaptation and vigilance in prophylactic strategies to effectively counter the dynamic and unpredictable nature of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.