Evidence Hub

Exploration for the effect of renal function and renal replacement therapy on pharmacokinetics of remdesivir and GS‐441524 in patients with COVID‐19: A limited case series

P. G. Choe, Sae Im Jeong, C. K. Kang, Liju Yang, SeungHwan Lee, Joo-Youn Cho, S. Han, D. K. Kim et al.

Clinical and Translational Science, 2021

441,524 participants · 11 citations

Abstract

Remdesivir, an antiviral agent for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), is metabolized intracellularly, with these metabolites eliminated predominantly in urine. Because of a lack of safety and pharmacokinetic (PK) data, remdesivir is not currently recommended for patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 and those on hemodialysis. This study evaluated the PKs of remdesivir and its metabolite, GS‐441524, in patients with COVID‐19 who were and were not receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT). This study enrolled two patients with normal renal function, two with impaired renal function not receiving RRT, two receiving continuous RRT (CRRT), and three undergoing intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). Patients were administered 200 mg remdesivir on the first day, followed by 100 mg/day for 5–10 days. Serial blood samples were collected for PK analysis, and PK parameters were assessed by a noncompartmental method. Systemic exposure to remdesivir was higher in patients with impaired renal function and those receiving CRRT than in patients with normal renal function, but was similar in patients undergoing IHD and those with normal renal function. By contrast, systemic exposure to GS‐441524 was highest in patients undergoing IHD, followed by patients with impaired renal function and those receiving CRRT, and lowest in patients with normal renal function. The PK profiles of remdesivir and GS‐441524 varied according to renal function…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 441,524 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free